I'd be inclined to wait for peer reviewed publications on a matter so subject to ideological controversy. (I can't judge the merits.)
-
-
-
Since the reproducibility crisis, peer review is no longer the arbiter of scientific "truth". Among other measures, early on debate of preprints among knowledgeable readers has become more important, which I invite.
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
The gist of this study is that he doesn't bother to control for structure and then achieves even greater levels of blur by disregarding this recommendation from a paper which he cites as he appears to have misinterpreted the nature of prGE: https://www.cell.com/ajhg/fulltext/S0002-9297(19)30231-9 …pic.twitter.com/MSJa0589p2
-
And this also appears screwy because Fst-1 is always going to be a negative value, need some specialists in here?pic.twitter.com/zqmpUHhMBb
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
It doesn't mean that. What's with this amateurish, erroneous logic? It almost certainly means that different, rarer variants are different between different lineages but that they've not yet been recognized. This applies to within-population *genetic* differences too.
@gcochran99 -
This is very unlikely given what we know about the distribution of rare variants and their contribution to trait.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
My guess is it’s largely due to a combo of prenatal and childhood nutrition/diet + environmental stressors.
-
Lack of brain development due to reduced availability to learn as well. Lead poisoning in some cases too possibly.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
some misunderstanding of within family and fallacious fst analysispic.twitter.com/TOv7c9P91Q
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.