corrinoids, analogues, cobalamins

[chico]

Hi everybody,

I'm getting a bit confused about some technical terms relating to the B12 issue. For many years I thought the term "analogues" related exclusively to the inactive forms of B12, only now I seem to realise it actually relates to all forms of B12, whether active or not. Can someone confirm this? I find it is used in both ways in many texts that are abundant on the web and it really does my head in!

Also, relating to corrinoids and cobalamins, the impression I have is that corrinoids are exclusively the inactive forms, whilst cobalamins are the active ones, and again, I find the terms being (ab)used with both meanings! Could someone clarify this?

Many thanks, all the best

Chico

[cedarblue]

hi there
have you managed to have a read through any of the other threads in this section yet? you may find some answers or extra info?
i'm finding the whole b12 thing very confusing at times too - i think i have it then it all changes again....


i found this thread interesting...
http://www.veganforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=257

[leedsveg]

Re vitamin B12-As far as I have been able to find out, Donald Watson who was a founder member of the UK Vegan Society in 1944, never took any vitamin tablets or vitamin supplemented food in his life and yet he reached 95 years of age. He lived an active life for many years in the Lake District, not the sunniest part of Britain, so he should also have been deficient in vitamin D, as well as B12. Did he not realise that his 'vegan diet' should have killed him before he was 50?

[chico]

What do I care if Donald Watson never took any vitamin B12 or D vitamin?? Maybe he was an alien or some kind of super being, the rest of us mere mortals should be reasonable enough to pay attention to some pretty straight forward facts and eat what we need to eat. Then again, your answer is completely off topic, and does not help me out in any way. Trolling is not helpful either, btw.
@ cedarblue, no I didn't really read them all in detail, I'll do it when I have the time, but I thought opening up this thread to sum it up a bit wouldn't harm

[Korn]

Re vitamin B12-As far as I have been able to find out, Donald Watson who was a founder member of the UK Vegan Society in 1944, never took any vitamin tablets or vitamin supplemented food in his life and yet he reached 95 years of age.

According to an interview I saw, he didn't take any other supplements than what he got via fortified food. The first British vegans, who were vegans before B12 as we know it was identified as B12 of (four years later) of course can't have been taking B12 supplements, because there were none. IIRR, "only" about 20% of them was later identified has having a B12 deficiency.

Nevertheless - disconnected from nature as we are, it's reasonable to assume that vegans and non-vegans alike will need more and more supplements for every generation, due to issues with soil, water and all that.

Chico, I may write something more about your question when I have more time. You are right, 'analogues' may be used about both the active and inactive stuff, which is why I try to remember to use the term 'inactive analogues' if that's what I mean, and 'active, bioavailable B12' if that's what I refer to.

This thread (B12 'analogues' more efficient than actual B12?) may have added to your confusion... right?


The whole thing is confusing. Before B12 was identified, health personal started to discover that liver ("liver juice") could help people against anemia, and while it's true that liver actually contains B12 - it's stored there - but various sources will tell you that the B12 stored in the liver mainly is inactive analogues, at least in humans.

To have inactive B12 analogues in our bodies/intestines is normal; it's not a vegan specific thing, and a main reason that many suggest that B12 tests without MMA and homocysteine tests won't tell you much (unless they show low B12 levels).

It actually seems like some writers (at least one site) more or less on purpose mix up the B12 analogue term with the active/bioavailable B12 term to 'scare' people into believing that vegans, unlike others, may risk getting only B12 analogues from their food.

It's hard to describe the whole B12 thing on less than a page or two - or three, so please have a look at the existing threads and ask question in these threads if you want - or try to ask very specific questions in this thread.

And, BTW, corrinoid simply means "a compound containing a corrin ring".

The important part is if the consumed B12 is absorbed properly, and if it has the wanted effect on on us. Neither of these are of course relevant if we don't consume any B12 at all, or if we do, but the B12 is being destroyed eg. by various B12 antagonistic elements.

[leedsveg]

Hi Chico
Sorry that my posting upset you. It was not intended as a specific reply to your query, nor even a feeble attempt at trolling. It was more aimed at vegans who just want to eat good, vegan meals without bothering too much about nutritional technicalities. I hope that you get all the information you need.

Re Donald Watson possibly being an alien, as far as we know, he was born and lived on planet earth. You give your location as Vega, a star of the constellation Lyra. Mmm. (I'm making a bad joke.)

Anyway, once again sorry

leedsveg

[sandra]

I don't know why B12 should be a problem for vegans...........isn't soya milk fortified with B12 anyway?........just use it everyday in one way or another and you should get enough B12.

[whalespace]

I have 'analogue' as meaning 'similar in form or function'.
That is, it might do the same thing as something which is physically slightly different....
or it might be made of the same things but be put together differently.
I remember 'analogue' replacing the word 'polymorph' as our chemistry teacher's 'catch-all' term for black or yellow sulphur; also diamond or graphite carbon.

I thought cobalamin was the radical attached to the cobalt atom.
Cyan-cobalamin: with carbon-nitrogen, [cyanide].
Hydroxy-cobalamin: with hydrogen-oxygen [maybe hydroxyl].

[chico]

Nevertheless - disconnected from nature as we are, it's reasonable to assume that vegans and non-vegans alike will need more and more supplements for every generation, due to issues with soil, water and all that.

The possibility that early vegans acquired significant B12 intake from food contaminated with B12-producing bacteria seems reasonable, and it's the first thing that came to my mind when I saw the comment on Donald Watson. I think this is what you describe as "connectedness to nature", and I would somehow tend to agree with you on that. I would rather not discuss this here, though, as I'm sure it'll get too off topic.

Chico, I may write something more about your question when I have more time.

Thank you. Please by all means do so.

You are right, 'analogues' may be used about both the active and inactive stuff, which is why I try to remember to use the term 'inactive analogues' if that's what I mean, and 'active, bioavailable B12' if that's what I refer to.

Yep. I've just become aware of this recently and that is exactly how I refer to it now too

This thread (B12 'analogues' more efficient than actual B12?) may have added to your confusion... right?

Not really, I hadn't read it

various sources will tell you that the B12 stored in the liver mainly is inactive analogues, at least in humans.

Oh really? I'd never heard that before. What is your opinion on it? Could you quote any sources?

To have inactive B12 analogues in our bodies/intestines is normal; it's not a vegan specific thing, and a main reason that many suggest that B12 tests without MMA and homocysteine tests won't tell you much (unless they show low B12 levels).

Absolutely.

It actually seems like some writers (at least one site) more or less on purpose mix up the B12 analogue term with the active/bioavailable B12 term to 'scare' people into believing that vegans, unlike others, may risk getting only B12 analogues from their food.

You might very well be right!

And, BTW, corrinoid simply means "a compound containing a corrin ring".

Ok, so are active analogues also corrinoids? And, subsidiary question, are there any inactive cobalamins?

[chico]

I don't know why B12 should be a problem for vegans...........isn't soya milk fortified with B12 anyway?........just use it everyday in one way or another and you should get enough B12.

Not all vegans consume soya milk, not all soya milks are fortified with B12, and yes, B12 can be a problem for vegans and even vegetarians, and a lot of non-vegan or non-vegetarians too.

[sandra]

Well, then they could just take a B12 supplement!

[chico]

Hi Chico
Sorry that my posting upset you. It was not intended as a specific reply to your query, nor even a feeble attempt at trolling. It was more aimed at vegans who just want to eat good, vegan meals without bothering too much about nutritional technicalities. I hope that you get all the information you need.

Re Donald Watson possibly being an alien, as far as we know, he was born and lived on planet earth. You give your location as Vega, a star of the constellation Lyra. Mmm. (I'm making a bad joke.)

Anyway, once again sorry

leedsveg

Hi leedsveg,
Apologies accepted, and sorry for the harsh comment. I did interpret your comment as typical trolling, and yes, I get very upset. I started this thread on a very technical point, I see no reason why it should go bezerk since the first reply with completely off-topic stuff, especially if they are an attempt at hijacking serious and honest discussion attempts and give irresponsible advice concerning vegan health issues. Irresponsability regarding the B12 issue causes harm to humans, and non-humans so I usually tend to get pretty upset.

Your joke is good

[chico]

Well, then they could just take a B12 supplement!

Of course they do. I suppose we all know that, or we should do. Do you have anything helpful to say? Sorry I don't want to be seen as an idiot, I've just landed here but I really don't see your point? Thank you.

[chico]

I have 'analogue' as meaning 'similar in form or function'.
That is, it might do the same thing as something which is physically slightly different....
or it might be made of the same things but be put together differently.
I remember 'analogue' replacing the word 'polymorph' as our chemistry teacher's 'catch-all' term for black or yellow sulphur; also diamond or graphite carbon.

I understand this is at least one of the definitions for it (if not the only). But that is contradictory to the definition that, adapted to our case here, considers both the inactive AND the active ones as analogues. According to the definition you gave, what do you name the non-analogue molecules then? I mean the "original" ones (as opposed to the analog ones), and adapted to our case, then what is(are) the non-analog B12 vitamin molecule(s)?

[Korn]

Oh really? I'd never heard that before. What is your opinion on it? Could you quote any sources?

Busy right now, but check existing threads about the topic - I've quoted sources already....

As a general note, and because this is confusing, and because B12 is a huge topic, I'd like to stick to the stuff that's really important, and IMHO, that's:

Killing as many myths as possible
Pointing at what's unclear
Using a language that contains as clear descriptions as possible
Informing about relevant things that some/many existing sites don't

Terminology is important, and/but IMO, we don't really need to deal with much more than the essential terminology when discussing the important bits.


95% of the B12 found in human stools are inactive B12 analogues, but most likely - 95% of the B12 we consume isn't inactive analogues. Therefore, an inactive B12 analogue appears to be active B12 that has "died". It has done it's work, is too old or worn out to do anything useful. And no, this isn't a proved and scientific theory, I'm not expecting a Nobel price for that theory. But it somehow could explain why many of us (myself included) talk about both these "objects" as B12, even if one of them is "dead", inactive. A dead bird is still a bird, but it's 'inactive'.

Chico, have you checked the other threads about similar topics? Please do, because each of these B12 threads can easily end up discussing everything B12 related.

Ok, so are active analogues also corrinoids?

Yes.

And, subsidiary question, are there any inactive cobalamins?

Some people would call them inactive cobalamin analogues, others would simply say yes.

Try to Google "inactive cobalamins" if you want to learn more about how the term is used...

Some links:

Conversion of endogenous cobalamins into microbiologically-inactive cobalamin analogues in rats by exposure to nitrous oxide

Endogenous origin of microbiologically-inactive cobalamins (cobalamin analogues) in the human fetus.

For a more detailed discussion, have a look at the 7000 messages (730 pages!) long thread here:
http://forums.wrongdiagnosis.com/sho...=9948&page=730

They touch topics we haven't even mentioned yet, like converting inactive analogues to active B12 - and more...

[sandra]

Of course they do. I suppose we all know that, or we should do. Do you have anything helpful to say? Sorry I don't want to be seen as an idiot, I've just landed here but I really don't see your point? Thank you.

Yes, I got the feeling you had 'just landed here'...............my point is...........stop stressing over B12 .....JUST TAKE A SUPPLEMENT.......if you're that worried!

You have been nothing but rude and arrogant on this thread, if anyone is a troll it's you who is coming across as such.

Why are you worrying so much about B12? If a human lacks anything necessary for good health then they can do something about it in a vegan way. There are millions of omnivores who lack vitamins plus have cholesterol etc in their diet to worry about..............they should be a hell of a lot more worried than someone wondering if they get enough B12

As I said, just take a pill! :smile:

[Korn]

Sandra, wanting to learn more about B12 doesn't mean that vegans need to worry more about nutrients than non-vegans....

I agree that Chico had a 'harsh tone' - but I assume that'll disappear. I understand his and others' need to try to get the terminology that is being used when discussing B12 right, especially since different writers use different terms for the same stuff...

He may not even be stressing over B12 - I don't, but still dive into books and sites discussing it from time to time, and have done that for a few years already. It's kind of like reading an exciting movie at times.... you know, the silly "who is the bad guy"-thingie.

One thing is certain: even in this movie, meat eaters aren't the good guys, because as you say, they often have deficiencies, are often low in B12 too, and statistics definitely don't document the great health effect of eating dead bodies...

[chico]

Yes, I got the feeling you had 'just landed here'...............my point is...........stop stressing over B12 .....JUST TAKE A SUPPLEMENT.......if you're that worried!

You have been nothing but rude and arrogant on this thread, if anyone is a troll it's you who is coming across as such.

Why are you worrying so much about B12? If a human lacks anything necessary for good health then they can do something about it in a vegan way. There are millions of omnivores who lack vitamins plus have cholesterol etc in their diet to worry about..............they should be a hell of a lot more worried than someone wondering if they get enough B12

As I said, just take a pill! :smile:

Got the feeling I just landed here? What a remarkable insight. I said I just landed here.

Arrogant? Who's being presumptuous right here? Who friggin said I was worried about anything at all? Did you hear me say I didn't take pills? If you have nothing useful to say in answer to the specific questions I've asked, please by all means just stay out of it. Yes you're trolling - just like any thread on B12 on any board it will just get trolled with useless crap.
It's like a vegan version of the Godwin's law for crying out loud.

Yes I'm rude. I find you rude too, because you're managing to hijack this with your presumptions on my worries or my intake of vitamin B12 pills. I have not been nothing but rude though. I have only been rude to you (and possibly to leedsveg, but we got over it )
Good evening.

[chico]

Busy right now, but check existing threads about the topic - I've quoted sources already....

Okeydokey, I'll try to catch up.

As a general note, and because this is confusing, and because B12 is a huge topic, I'd like to stick to the stuff that's really important, and IMHO, that's:

Killing as many myths as possible
Pointing at what's unclear
Using a language that contains as clear descriptions as possible
Informing about relevant things that some/many existing sites don't

Exactly! We're thinking along the same lines here.

Terminology is important, and/but IMO, we don't really need to deal with much more than the essential terminology when discussing the important bits.

Absolutely. It's very important to grasp the exact meaning of the technical terms and use them accordingly.

95% of the B12 found in human stools are inactive B12 analogues, but most likely - 95% of the B12 we consume isn't inactive analogues. Therefore, an inactive B12 analogue appears to be active B12 that has "died". It has done it's work, is too old or worn out to do anything useful. And no, this isn't a proved and scientific theory, I'm not expecting a Nobel price for that theory. But it somehow could explain why many of us (myself included) talk about both these "objects" as B12, even if one of them is "dead", inactive. A dead bird is still a bird, but it's 'inactive'.

Do you have any insights as to how this could happen, in chemical terms (ie. an active analog being transformed into inactive by chemical reaction with something). If you find this out, I'll happily nominate you to a vegan nobel prize equivalent of some sort

Some people would call them inactive cobalamin analogues, others would simply say yes.

Ok, but just to make sure I get it clear: are cobalamins also corrinoids?

Thanks ever so much for all your info!

edit: just got the answer and it's yes, they're corrinoids:

"All corrinoids (including all cobalamins) are considered B12 analogues. Many corrinoids, and possibly even some cobalamins, are not useable by human B12 enzymes. These are considered inactive B12 analogues."

Thanks to Jack Norris
http://www.veganhealth.org/b12/mol (7h paragraph)

[sandra]

Got the feeling I just landed here? What a remarkable insight. I said I just landed here.

Arrogant? Who's being presumptuous right here? Who friggin said I was worried about anything at all? Did you hear me say I didn't take pills? If you have nothing useful to say in answer to the specific questions I've asked, please by all means just stay out of it. Yes you're trolling - just like any thread on B12 on any board it will just get trolled with useless crap.
It's like a vegan version of the Godwin's law for crying out loud.

Yes I'm rude. I find you rude too, because you're managing to hijack this with your presumptions on my worries or my intake of vitamin B12 pills. I have not been nothing but rude though. I have only been rude to you (and possibly to leedsveg, but we got over it )
Good evening.

Hope you find what you're looking for Chico!

[chico]

Me too, Sandra, me too. Sorry about being so harsh. I hope you'll understand. Maybe chat to you sometime regarding something we might have in common?

take care

[Korn]

Thanks to Jack Norris
http://www.veganhealth.org/b12/mol (7h paragraph)

That site is actually a main reason there's so much confusion about B12 and vegan food.

In a way, what matters the most isn't always the real meaning of 'analogue' or 'corrinoid', but how most people use these words. Most people use 'analogue' about inactive B12 of some sort, and that site use B12 only about "active B12 analogues". An average, semi-well-informed vegan, who believes that B12 analogue = inactive B12, will - after a visit in that site - believe that all B12 in all plants is inactive, because it's a vegan site and mean 'active B12 analogues' when they write B12 (unless otherwise noted).

That's a perfect thing to do on a vegan site if you want to strengthen or keep alive the myth about inactive B12 analogues only existing in plants etc.

In the midst of all their B12 writings, they also suddenly post a link to Tom Billings propaganda about humans being 'natural omnivores'. Tom Billings, a personal friend of Jack Norris, is busy trying to give the impression that he is 'beyond vegetarianism', and when he is writing in his twisted, pseudo-scientific style he is often emphasizing irrelevant facts, "facts", and nourishing old myths.

A typical example would be how he tries to give more or less give an impression that humans should eat what gorillas do. Gorillas aren't 100% vegans... Articles like those found on this site causes illogical conclusions based on statements like "Chimps and bonobos, our closest relatives, hunt and kill vertebrates and eat occasional meat." Chimps don't copy humans, no animal copies other animals, so why should we? Why does a B12 article on a vegan site need to promote articles claiming that humans are omnivores in the first place?

IMO one of the best things that can be done to promote veganism, and to strive for detailed, honest, strictly fact-oriented view on vegan nutrition, is to NOT promote Norris' sites (veganoutreach and veganhealth). Luckily, most vegans are doing a great job in this respect already. I'll go further than just not promoting them, I'd rather suggest to boycott them actively.

The link between veganhealth.org/Jack Norris, the nonsense on beyondveg.com and The Vegan Society linking to them just after having posted the motto "Good information supports vegan health, pass it around" is IMO relatively ugly, and a perfect example of how one should not inform about B12.

Do you have any insights as to how this could happen, in chemical terms (ie. an active analog being transformed into inactive by chemical reaction with something).

Yes - check existing threads, or eg. PubMed-articles. like this one, for example:
Presence and formation of cobalamin analogues in multivitamin-mineral pills.

Here are some of the main B12 threads on our site that may interest you:

B12 and B12 analogues in multivitamins, animal foods and spirulina
50 ways to develop B12 deficiency
Vitamin B12: All Cobalamins are not Equal

[chico]

Korn,

I must say I'm pretty shocked and disturbed by what you've just stated.
Why do you claim that site is the a main reason about this confusion? I really don't see why. It seems pretty clear Jack Norris clearly adresses analogues as both the active and the inactive ones, and that he does so consistently throughout the whole site. Please by all means correct me if I wrong, which I may very well be. If in bio-chemistry there is some confusion regarding the use of the term "analog" by techniciens and by laymen, I can hardly see how that can be imputed to Jack Norris.
If there is generalised abuse of that word in the vegan scene and if that site takes a stand aiming to correct that, I can hardly see how that could be seen as wrong-doing, rather I would think it's the other way around.
You say there are various people writing on that site, care to elaborate? (you said "their writings".)
Tom Billings' positions, which I'm not familiar with, might be dodgy, but the reference to this I've found on veganhealth.org seems pretty straight-forward, and if anything, I would say it only serves the cause of killing old myths! I'm not exactly sure what you're talking about. Humans are omnivores, and it seems pretty clear that what is written down in veganhealth.org is that we don't need to copy what other animals do, or even what other humans do, or might have done, for that matter!

You really don't need the naturalness claim to be a veg*n! That is, moral/spiritual reasons alone are adequate to justify following a veg*n diet (assuming the diet works for you, of course). Further, if the motivation for your diet is moral and/or spiritual, then you will want the basis of your diet to be honest as well as compassionate. In that case, ditching the false myths of naturalness presents no problems; indeed, ditching false myths means that you are ditching a burden.

(...)

Whose Diet is Really Natural?

The suffering endured by the majority of animals raised in contemporary animal agriculture far outweighs any desire of mine to eat the same as my prehistoric ancestors. But, even if the animals' suffering were of no consequence, these assumptions are dubious:

* There is one prehistoric or natural diet.
* This diet can reasonably be approximated today.
* This diet is optimal for human health in today's world.

Today's commercial plant foods and meats are different than the foods available in prehistoric times. We eat hybrids of plants and we feed foods to animals that they would not normally eat. We keep them confined so that they do not exercise. We cook animal products to make them palatable and to kill pathogens. We cook vegetable foods that would otherwise be inedible. The U.S. food supply is routinely fortified with a host of vitamins and minerals (such as vitamin D in milk), and most people who turn to what they consider to be a more natural diet as adults have often benefited from this supplementation.

I've now done some reading on this website and I've come accross some of your posts, and whilst I admire your work on the B12 issue, and I'm eager to discuss this with you, I think I'm starting to understand that you promote naturalism, so i'm really not sure what you're talking about right here.

The claim that that website should be boycotted seems pretty strong and I would kindly ask you to present some valid arguments, because I fail to see any at this time.

[Korn]

Hi, check earlier posts/threads re. 'naturalism' (this word can have different meanings, so I won't really comment 'naturalism' here). We have many posts/threads about whether eating meat is natural, whether a plant based diet is natural, whether it means anything if something is natural or not (etc) already...

Re. my viewpoints on how they present the vegan/B12 topic, you'll probably understand what I mean by reading some of my other threads, I'll give you some time to do that (if you're interested, that is) before I'll try to explain what I've explained a few times before....

[chico]

Fair enough, catch you later then.

[whalespace]

I understand this is at least one of the definitions for it (if not the only). But that is contradictory to the definition that, adapted to our case here, considers both the inactive AND the active ones as analogues. According to the definition you gave, what do you name the non-analogue molecules then? I mean the "original" ones (as opposed to the analog ones), and adapted to our case, then what is(are) the non-analog B12 vitamin molecule(s)?

Absolutely. It's very important to grasp the exact meaning of the technical terms and use them accordingly.

Definitions need only be consistent within the confines of some well formed formula, hypothesis, document, programme , or other object which relies on internal consistency.

It really depends on what one is trying to do.

If i was in a class, then I might name each molecule under discussion with names familiar to researchers [even Thelma, Aldrin, Crickleback, or Smurf]...such that their roles could be understood... then adopt structural descriptions where necessary.

I know differing definitions can be annoying, but the trail is littered with relics formed by dynamic complexes [involving humans].

[chico]

Well I couldn't engage in a discussion on semiotics but I think your approach is a bit too reductionist. I'm sure one does not use terms in certain technical domains as it pleases him

[whalespace]

Terms are only ever understood by discussion and agreement....and then only by those people whom agreed.
If you need to differentiate between analogues, then get a list of them.
As for reductive behaviour, I usually dismantle things only when I need the pieces to be separate.
Good luck with the microgrammes.

One could also be an it or a her....unless you are specifying.

[chico]

As I said semiotics is not my field so I couldn't follow you into it.
Having said that, I have a feeling that some terms do have some sort of "official" or widespread or traditional academic convention as to what their meaning is. They aren't just randomly used, which is what I have the feeling is what you're saying.
I don't know what you're talking about when mentioning dismantling things... I see no connection between that and the claim that your explanation had been too simplistic. Whatever, nevermind!
Anyway, regarding our case, if we're just going to defend the theory that "analogues" don't have any specific meaning and can just be used randomly, we won't be able to evolve much on this discussion I'm afraid... but if you prove yourself right I'm willing to recognize you are right
One could also be an it or a her? How could one be an it? I can hardly see how a person that uses technical terms can be an "it". English is not my native language so I'm sorry if I didn't feminize my speech enough, but I don't see the point about the "it"...

[sandra]

Me too, Sandra, me too. Sorry about being so harsh. I hope you'll understand. Maybe chat to you sometime regarding something we might have in common?

take care

Well, there's bound to be SOMETHING we have in common Chico...........oh yes we are both vegan!

[chico]

[whalespace]

Your fluency with english language is fantastic Chico.
Enjoy your freedom.

[chico]

Semantics rather than semiotics would have been more appropriate, actually.

I mean, I understand what you're saying whalespace but surely the term "analog" must have some sort of consensual meaning, at least in such a technical and accute domain as bio-chemistry? I mean I'm having a hard time trying to accept that it can be used in such contradictory ways...

[whalespace]

Sorry Chico, I got the impression that you would rather be mapping metabolic pathways for us.... I only meant to offer a mental workaround regarding class descriptors.

I guess this thread will be considered redundant soon, so I don't mind seeming off topic for a chat.

I haven't read the text[s] to which you refer, so I cannot help decipher them, nor help tick off permutations from a list of possible meanings. Text can be an ambiguous medium, especially when its users parse the sentences with different rules.
Grouping a selection of similar objects into a class, can be used to avoid inserting [sometimes very long] lists into sentences at times when such insertion might disrupt the formation of useful mental constructs [ideas]. If I then refer to a subset of this class by using the class name [eg class=analog{s}], then ambiguity could be generated. The ambiguity could result from eventualities involving non relevant class members, or from considering the name of the relevant member to be the name of the class [eg analog].


I have read books which seem to spend the first two or three chapters redefining a word , or at least creating a 'primary sense' for the purposes of the particular script [script, book, author]. Sometimes a new word would have been easier. I formed the opinion that reductionists tended to split larger systems into what they considered to be component parts...hoping that doing so would provide insight into how the larger system functioned. Some would argue that studying how the larger system interacted with environments exterior to it, might be a more useful pursuit. When I suggested tagging each analog, I was attempting to focus on the metabolic transactions of interest.

[chico]

Showing off a bit are you?

[whalespace]

Not my intention.

[chico]

Ok. Thanks, I appreciate the honesty. Anyway yes this thread is going a bit funny, actually I'm taking some time to catch up with what has been said on this subject already, on this forum, as Korn suggested.