Genes vs environment: a false dichotomy

Neuroscientists Sam Wang and Sandra Aamodt have a guest post on Olivia Judson's NY Times blog discussing the complex interplay between genes and environment in the determination of personality traits. A taste:

So some of the effects that we call "genetic" (or "nature") are the
indirect result of people being drawn to particular environments
because of their personality. Or to put it another way, some
"environmental" (or "nurture") effects are actually attributable to
genetic tendencies.

It's worth noting that similar effects can occur for other traits: for instance, a genetic variant that increased sugar cravings or decreased motivation to exercise could have an effect on obesity risk; a variant that increased susceptibility to a specific virus might increase the risk of auto-immune diseases triggered by viral infection. In each case, the genetic variant increases disease risk indirectly by altering exposure to an environmental risk factor.

 Subscribe to Genetic Future.

More like this

An article in the latest issue of the New England Journal of Medicine takes a look at the sharing of genetic risk factors between type 1 diabetes and celiac disease, two reasonably common auto-immune disorders (affecting ~0.4 and ~0.1%, respectively, of individuals of northern European origin).…
Student guest post by Liz Stepniak In the field of chronic disease, genetics has long been determined as a component of disease susceptibility. Infectious disease was believed to be caused by an agent of infection, such as a virus or bacteria which comprises a large environmental factor. In the…
Nejentsev et al. (2009). Rare Variants of IFIH1, a Gene Implicated in Antiviral Responses, Protect Against Type 1 Diabetes. Science DOI: 10.1126/science.1167728 The first item on my long list of predictions for 2009 was that this will be the year of rare variants for common disease - the year that…
Edited 2/2/09: The cited study discusses pre-natal genetic screening, not only embryo screening; I've updated some wording to reflect this, but it doesn't have any major impact on the overall message. Razib points to an article suggesting that Australian couples are "flocking" to a US fertility…

you gotta be kidding me... doesn't anyone read Fisher anymore??
ok.. even g.c.williams/
or, if you're a behaviorist, at least go back to jerry.hirsch.

nah. lets stick with Fisher.
after one breaks down (G) into additive (A), dominance (D) and epistasis (I) ... G*E and r(GE), are, mostly, minor components....

btw -- twin studies inheritantly overstimate all of these components (even with some of the newer statistical models), but are superb for elucidating environmental influences...