[Duxide]

@Duxide

What is the correlation adding 3 of the latest alleles? Including the one that is more common among Africans?

The first 3 don't replicate that well from what I have seen. Which is the 4th allele you speak of? Where was it found?

Either way both GCTA and GWAS are simply imagining the effect size and function then assuming the correlation is causation. All can be falsified with evidence to the contrary.

The other 3 alleles were not replicated hence I didn't use them. I used only replicated alleles. For info on the SNPs sources you'll have to wait until I publish my paper.

[Zoidberg]

@Duxide

What is the correlation adding 3 of the latest alleles? Including the one that is more common among Africans?

The first 3 don't replicate that well from what I have seen. Which is the 4th allele you speak of? Where was it found?

Either way both GCTA and GWAS are simply imagining the effect size and function then assuming the correlation is causation. All can be falsified with evidence to the contrary.

The other 3 alleles were not replicated hence I didn't use them. I used only replicated alleles. For info on the SNPs sources you'll have to wait until I publish my paper.

Ok but which is the 4th allele you are using?

[Zoidberg]

@ Chuck.

I cant promise any graphs but I will try to find more UK and Dutch data when I have time. Dutch data is what I am really after.

[Duxide]

@Duxide

What is the correlation adding 3 of the latest alleles? Including the one that is more common among Africans?

The first 3 don't replicate that well from what I have seen. Which is the 4th allele you speak of? Where was it found?

Either way both GCTA and GWAS are simply imagining the effect size and function then assuming the correlation is causation. All can be falsified with evidence to the contrary.

The other 3 alleles were not replicated hence I didn't use them. I used only replicated alleles. For info on the SNPs sources you'll have to wait until I publish my paper.

Ok but which is the 4th allele you are using?

rs236330

[Zoidberg]

@ Duxide.

Thanks. Can you also tell me in which papers the rs236330 genes replicated/originated? Is it these two, having trouble opening the sup files.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles...82557/#SD1
http://www.nature.com/mp/journal/v19/n2/...2184a.html

[Duxide]

@ Duxide.

Thanks. Can you also tell me in which papers the rs236330 genes replicated/originated? Is it these two, having trouble opening the sup files.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles...82557/#SD1
http://www.nature.com/mp/journal/v19/n2/...2184a.html

Yes it's these two.

[Zoidberg]

Thanks Duxide.

Some data on twins and epigenetics.

http://www.mdpi.com/2073-4425/5/2/347

[Chuck]

Thanks Duxide.
Some data on twins and epigenetics.
http://www.mdpi.com/2073-4425/5/2/347

What does this have to do with general intelligence? I referred you to a discussion which you obviously did not read.

[Edit: One can biometrically model variance due to epigenetics. If proponents of IQ-epigenetics want to show that Var(Epi) is non-trivial they should try to show it. As it is, we know that directly estimated additive (GCTA), non-shared environmental (MZ twin discordance), shared environmental (unrelated sib reared together), and error variance can, in conjunction, account for almost all of the IQ variance. The only significant role that epigenetics has to play with respect to IQ (g) is an adversarial rhetorical one.]

[Zoidberg]

Thanks Duxide.
Some data on twins and epigenetics.
http://www.mdpi.com/2073-4425/5/2/347

What does this have to do with general intelligence? I referred you to a discussion which you obviously did not read.

[Edit: One can biometrically model variance due to epigenetics. If proponents of IQ-epigenetics want to show that Var(Epi) is non-trivial they should try to show it. As it is, we know that directly estimated additive (GCTA), non-shared environmental (MZ twin discordance), shared environmental (unrelated sib reared together), and error variance can, in conjunction, account for almost all of the IQ variance. The only significant role that epigenetics has to play with respect to IQ (g) is an adversarial rhetorical one.]

Twin, GCTA and GWAS are all based on assumptions, GCTA and GWAS literally imagine an effect size because there are apparently many genes with so small effect that you have to make it up to find it. Also you have to assume that they are even having an effect in the first place.

Please I am not trying to say that its not possible or that traditional studies cannot account for the variation even ALL OF IT, but you have an alternate now with direct chemical and biological evidence of heritible chemical changes to genes and resulting in changes to phenotypes. There is literally more detectable chemical/biological interactions with epigenetics than there are genetic ones without assuming.

Also I read your link long time ago, before I even started posting on this website.

You know what I will seize to post anything about epigentics in this thread as it will derail it.

[Chuck]

You know what I will [cease] to post anything about epigentics in this thread as it will derail it.

You can open up a new thread on the topic.