Information Biology bases itself essentially on the origins of Quantum Biology, as well as the observation of the phenomenon of life as emerging from existence.
Biological information is identified as the interface of Quantum Biology (uncertainty, Quantum Physics), between cell- and Microbiology, Genetics, Epigenetics, Proteomics, DNA, junk DNA and interactions with the environment.
The phenomenon of "Life" is deeply rooted in the principles of Quantum Biology. Evolution is a result of emergence - more than Jacques Monod's chance and necessity.
These origins, in which important parts of life, particularly all aspects of cell- and Microbiology in relation to their permanent exchange with the environment and nature are set, can be useful for people.
The resulting complex exchange of information from this can, for example, be usable through the inclusion of the thereby-induced permanent dynamics.
The biological information approach (Information based biology) has been developed within the framework of the Hixgrid Research Network.
Biological information applications: Cancer research.
The research for the cause of cancer serves as an example.
The fundamental assumption, that biological processes for the purpose of static DNA-Paradigms are irreversible (pure post-natal contemplation), is insofar incorrect, as there is already no "forwards-induction" in this sense, since as a result, an "autopoietic system" cannot be allowed to be lead back to one of the preferred conditions of nature. Furthermore, this would not provide a helpful view for the preservation of those, for whom life is a form of existence in a fight with and against nature; in the permanent change of nature.
When microorganisms operate Bet-Hedging, that is, produce examples with different characteristics in a random process, for this measuring time, uncertain, however with the higher possibility of permanently changing environmental conditions (chance and necessity), then they have however, not anticipated the future!
It is known from theoretical physics, that time as such does not exist, but permanent uncertainty (Heisenberg, Quantum Biology): Quantum physics teaches us that we don't measure, but create a state by a measurement, since the Bell inequalities are violated. As a result, a "permanent" state is "locally" produced through the interaction of particles, and projected as a condition for existence in the real world (lower lights, v < c). In other words, a measurement can only produce a state; vice versa, even a screening can also do this!
Quantum biology teaches us that there is no direct, linear cause-effect derivation from the observable world (that is observable to us, in comparison to the unobservable universe).
Complex references mean that a complex-valued quasi-system cannot be grasped analytically (completely describable), as an endless number of equations are induced (Analogy to Physics: there are no mathematical solutions possible to the 3-Body problem).
Since cancer is created from Quantum Biology and mutation, there is no "treatment" in this sense for cancer, since neither mutation nor life are themselves an illness.
But the probability that states which are created by a measurement are allowing a preferred state of nature (means Existence) is not zero! Hence it should be possible to remind those mutations (refusing apoptosis) to the conditions of existence of the organism they are part of.
Special thanks to Rima Meta - Stephen Hawking Group Admin (FB) and researcher in physics/metaphysics/philosophy in science - for translation from German.
Quote by DuJuan Ross: "...In Nature, ants and bees commit suicide for the good of their colonies. Likewise, a fundamental feature of organic Life, is the apoptosis of certain cells whose usefulness to the soma ostends to be superfluous at some point. In the early history of cancer treatment, researchers operated under a significant misapprehension: instead of looking for agents that kill dividing cells, they should have been looking for agents that coaxed cell suicide! ....Now that research is on the right path, results in curing some cancers may improve. Chemotherapy has not been wholly ineffective, mind you! But its effectiveness was only by accident: It does manage to alleviate short-term agony in some victims of malignancies." Unquote
instead of looking for agents that kill dividing cells, they should have been looking for agents that coaxed cell suicide ...
Cytotoxic killer t cell attacking a cancer-cell
The problem is, that there are only few dividing cells in our (adult) bodies. But how will you differentiate, which cell should undergo cell suicide and which one not?
My answer: ....Well DuJuan was talking about research and the way scientists targeted the phenomenon cancer, for instance by chemotherapy -- - which cannot fight any "cause" of cancer in case you might be able to identify a specific cause, cancer seems to be relict of a time when radiation levels at Earth or the atmosphere (when it is not inherent anyway by mutation and radioactivity, radioisotopes, for instance at PNA or microorganisms in space, mutation is random, selection is -- not?! hmm, yes, but the permanent change in the environment is randomly as well, the measurement is locally!) were decreasing and there was a need to weed out alleles.
DuJuan was talking about a wrong way to target agents that induced cell division - this is the (wrong) assumption of scientists in those days in order to avoid the growing of those malignant tumors, they wanted to diminish the carcinoma tissue - DuJuan said correctly in THIS CONTEXT that the better idea would be to look for agents that coaxed cell suicide because cancer is related to apoptosis - hence this has nothing to do with identifying dividing cells - when you could "re-enhance" apoptosis again, this is the working hypothesis of those scientists, then you would be able to fight back cancer ...
But in my opinion you have at first to look for the "cause" of cancer, and then you will see what quantum biology means: in quantum biology there is no direct linear cause-effect attribution in the observable world - bet hedging
teaches us that every microorganism is a RANDOM SAMPLE, there was NO PREDICTIVE MECHANISM at all, "selection" is LOCALLY not randomly, but on the whole "sphere" of life, you will see that selection is just a random process as well within local boundaries, when you could repeat a path of evolution there would NEVER be the same result -- it is about a higher order by an inverse entropy in a Boltzmann brain scenario, an organism needs to uphold its ability for adaption in a changing environment - there is no perfect equilibrium in nature and never was, never will be, no symmetries or asymmetries ... chemotherapy is destroying your ability to adapt and your cells and it doesn't remove any "cause" which is often at the "information level"!
Cancer is "induced" by a random factor (quantum biology , radioactivity, mutation) in conjunction with our virome and viruses (HPV 16, HPV 18,..) epigenetics, Proteomics, Junk-DNA , radioactivity and some more "factors" by a random process in a changing environment (quantum measurements). --> Central Dogma in molecular biology
DuJuan Ross came up with this brilliant conclusion that cancer is not a disease and I agreed!
The mystery is that although there is a random factor, according to my research there seems to be a link between bad social conditions, a person experiencing negative stress, and cancer - how can this be??
I have no direct answer to this yet, but you have to look on the quantum level for radioisotopes - for instance smoking is not causing cancer (but bad for your arteries), but extremely high radiation triggers mutation -- hmm, I recommend people not to even think of chemotherapy, a positive environment and some mental support in conjunction with some "trigger" factors, but JUST for an INITIATION in the picture of a quantum threshold in a biotope (growth factor) are helpful and of course open minded research, there is help for brain cancer by a measles or herpes virus based approach, but this cannot work in the same way for every patient - p-values are debunked - every human being is a random sample!
Now remember: you cannot kill cancer unless you kill the patient - mutation means life - as long as there is life there will be cancer and vice versa but you might try to kill the BELIEF in cancer - when it does not rule your thoughts and you eliminate some causes, which are mainly in the range of negative experiences, negative stress and a viscious circle after being declared not capable, being rejected and so forth, unless you are not living beneath a highly potential radioactive source and of coure a random factor and our virome .. in fact many factors .... an endless list .. but how does it happen that a factor is activated? this is the biggest mystery and i do not believe in just randomness or a monocausal factor.
It is important to ask the "correct" question for a situation and problem ....and to understand quantum biology ....
I remember a friend who died by cancer in 2014 at the age of 60 - I do not think that he did no more want to live and I have thought a long time about the reason why he even did not fight against the physicians in order to avoid chemotherapy - i told him in 2012 that in case I would have got this diagnosis, then i would NEVER more talk to physicians and IMMEDIATELY "hang up the phone" - and start to believe in my life and a way to trigger a positive feeling against the DIAGNOSIS - not cancer (!) - still looking to the right and left for open minded research but basically let nature or my nature decide, allowing my cells to become myself and let's see whether my time would really have come -
Now I think I have found the answer why he even didn't start to FIGHT FOR ITS VERY LIFE --- this was because this diagnosis was very severe and DESTROYED any hope for life in its inner core - the BELIEF in this DIAGNOSIS has killed him, not cancer!! I am sure he would have a chance when he would have started to fight - and physicians destroy him by threatening him, oh, Mr. XYZ, we can stop chemotherapy in case you prefer this ... --- is this really a threat?
He should never have started it! Sometimes it is better to ignore such things .....