Sure, but if they don't control for genetics, they are uninterpretable, and not worth the paper they're printed on
'Behavior is the interaction of genes & environment'? Yet the most famous example of a _statistical_ GxE interaction has now been debunked.https://twitter.com/DegenRolf/status/911201692233994241 …
-
-
-
there are studies controlling for genes and still finding effects of abuse, my dude https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2964497/ …https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11825135
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Most famous? What about PKU gene x dietary modification effect on IQ?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Your two examples involve no theory of mechanism
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Just a proof of concept. Problem with polygenic is generating theory for a priori prediction.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
haha, same question I asked!
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
So did I, then I learned more about it. I'd recommend "The Nurture Assumption" by Judy Harris.
End of conversation
-
-
-
Behavior genetics put this stuff to bed a while ago, but nobody wants to accept it
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Let all that junk about parental treatment go after reading "The Nurture Assumption" by Judy Harris
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.