Apologies for not posting anything recently. I have something in the works at BigThink and a few more in the pipeline but it has been hard finding the time to blog recently. I hope to be back to it in a couple of weeks.
You don't have to worry about it. I know that it is quite hard to give enough time to blog something. It takes a lot of time that why I am impressed with sites like xlpharmacy facts because they are adding content constantly.
Enormous statistics I like your post. It is good to see you express from the heart and accuracy on this important subject can be easily captured here. MBA Thesis Writing
What if we’ve been thinking about the genetics of intelligence from completely the wrong angle? Intelligence (as indexed by IQ or the general intelligence factor “ g ”) is clearly highly heritable in humans – people who are more genetically similar are also more similar in this factor. (Genetic variance has been estimated as explaining ~75% of variance in g , depending on age and other factors). There must therefore be genetic variants in the population that affect intelligence – so far, so good. But the search for such variants has, at its heart, an implicit assumption: that these variants affect intelligence in a fairly specific way – that they will occur in genes “for intelligence”. An implication of that phrase is that mutations in those genes were positively selected for at some stage in humanity’s descent from our common ancestor with apes, on the basis of conferring increased intelligence . This seems a fairly reasonable leap to make – suc...
Can molecular memories of our ancestors’ experiences affect our own behaviour and physiology? That idea has certainly grabbed hold of the public imagination, under the banner of the seemingly ubiquitous buzzword “epigenetics”. Transgenerational epigenetic inheritance is the idea that a person’s experiences can somehow mark their genomes in ways that are passed on to their children and grandchildren. Those marks on the genome are then thought to influence gene expression and affect the behaviour and physiology of people who inherit them. The way this notion is referred to – both in popular pieces and in the scientific literature – you’d be forgiven for thinking it is an established fact in humans, based on mountains of consistent, compelling evidence. In fact, the opposite is true – it is based on the flimsiest of evidence from a very small number of studies with very small sample sizes and serious methodological flaws. [Note that there is, b...
A new paper just out in Nature , by Peter Visscher and colleagues (including bio-ethicist Julian Salvulescu) explores the idea of polygenic genome editing of human embryos to reduce the risk of common diseases. This is, to say the least, a controversial idea, and a decidedly fantastical one. The authors present the results of statistical modelling which suggests that editing a small number of risk variants in each embryo’s genome could dramatically reduce the risk of a number of common disorders. But there are good reasons (lots of them) to doubt the assumptions on which this modelling is based and to have serious concerns about possibly deleterious unintended consequences of such interventions. I co-wrote a commentary on the article with geneticist Shai Carmi and law professor and bio-ethicist Hank Greely, outlining some of the limitations of the modelling and our concerns over the dangers of the proposed approach. I’ll expand on those points here. First, the development...
Looking forward to seeing your BigThoughts :)
ReplyDeleteYou don't have to worry about it. I know that it is quite hard to give enough time to blog something. It takes a lot of time that why I am impressed with sites like xlpharmacy facts because they are adding content constantly.
ReplyDeleteEnormous statistics I like your post. It is good to see you express from the heart and accuracy on this important subject can be easily captured here.
ReplyDeleteMBA Thesis Writing