“Polygenic scores are not pure measures of ‘inborn ability,’ and genome-wide association studies of human intelligence and educational attainment are not inevitably ushering in a new eugenics age.”https://leapsmag.com/genetic-test-scores-predicting-intelligence-are-not-the-new-eugenics/ …
-
-
Rare variants can certainly be captured in principle by whole genomes. But can they be identified as affecting a trait if they are exceedingly rare and the effect is relatively small? That sounds like a hard statistical problem, even with huge datasets.
-
Depends on their effect sizes and frequencies. Perhaps you can find a sweet spot where we can't reasonably find them, e.g. with small effect sizes (e.g. 0.01 IQ) and frequencies below 1 in 1e-6. Progress is made fast, so I don't expect us to end up in that situation.
-
What's going to be interesting is to see how low we can go, in terms of frequency and effect. Obviously big datasets are the best remedy. But it may be some heritability still goes missing even with great statistical methods -- perhaps different amounts for different traits.
-
Possibly. So far, personality GWASing is not having much success, so might be due to different genetic architecture or measurement issues of the traits themselves (I think the latter).
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.