sciguy,
What you are attempting to squirm around is that "junk DNA' is a term that means, "we really have no idea what goes on in here".
As soon as something is discovered in an area of "junk DNA" that area is immediately relabeled as something else.
Furthermore your attempt to portray a 'regulatory binding site' as something outside of the protein coding process, says more about your aversion to reality than mine.
Without that site, without all other regulatory factors that are a part of the protein coding process, there would be no protein, period.
The process of creating a protein from DNA sequences is very much like the process of transferring an e-mail message over the internet. There is the text of the message itself which is akin to the CODE, there is the Header and Footer information within the tranferred serial packets, Introns and Exons. There is formatting information hidden from the screen but essential for the correct display of the message when it reaches its target. All in all there is a great deal of information, not limited to the text itself, even though that is the main component. Nevertheless ALL OF IT is part of the coding process.
Let's try again with Yes/No questions this time.
Does the SNP in your example (1608 bases upstream of the transcription start site) play a part in the successful 'CODING' of the protein? Yes or No.
If that one is too hard for you, try this one.
If the SNP variation is present, does the protein CODE the same as if it were absent? Yes or No.
Nice to see you back again. What's with all the aliases?
regards,
frog
AI
Market Data 
Markets 
