1
   

Nature: 1; Nurture: 0

 
 
Reply Tue 12 Aug, 2008 11:18 am
Well, my title is certainly an oversimplification but score one for Nature, according to recent studies in genetics.

This week's Newsweek reports on some interesting studies about child development.

Read all about it at: http://www.newsweek.com/id/151758

Among the findings:

Quote:
• The gene variant that influences whether children learn from their mistakes. With the misspelled gene, brains have about 30 percent fewer dopamine receptors and less activity in the brain's frontal cortex (the site of higher-order thinking, including monitoring negative feedback) and hippocampus (memory) than do people with the more common form of the gene. In an experiment at the Max Planck Institute for Neurological Research in Germany, people with the misspelling weren't able to avoid choices that they were told over and over were incorrect. Numerous other studies have linked this gene variant to addiction, obesity and compulsive gambling, suggesting that the underlying problem is trouble learning the negative consequences of your actions.

• The DNA variant that affects whether a baby's brain development will be spurred by breast-feeding, which has been reported to confer an extra half-dozen or so IQ points by kindergarten. But not all breast-fed babies are little Einsteins, making their mothers wonder why all the milk-stained blouses didn't seem to boost cognitive development. The reason seems to be that there are two forms of a gene called FADS2. In the 90 percent of babies who carry the "C" form, breast-feeding raises intelligence by an average of nearly seven IQ points, scientists led by Terrie Moffitt and Avshalom Caspi of Duke University reported last year. This version of FADS2 produces an enzyme that helps convert the fatty acids in breast milk into compounds that help signals zip along brain neurons and spur neurons to sprout connections, which underlie intelligence, memory and creativity. The 10 percent of babies who carry the other form of the gene lack the enzyme and therefore derive no cognitive benefit from breast-feeding (though they still get an immune-system boost from it).

• DNA variants can protect children from bad parenting


Do you think the day could be coming when parents are actually given an instruction manual when their kids are born?
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 1,090 • Replies: 5
No top replies

 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Aug, 2008 11:25 am
I think they need one long before that.
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Aug, 2008 01:46 pm
Interesting -- both the article and your question.
0 Replies
 
boomerang
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Aug, 2008 09:30 pm
I'm glad someone else found it as interesting as I did, FreeDuckl

I do wonder though, if kids came with a blueprint about how to raise them if people would follow it.

If they did follow it would we end up with some very homogenous society?
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Aug, 2008 07:58 am
I don't know the answer, boomer.

Ok, don't laugh at me. When my kids were about 1 and 3 I went online and did both of their horoscopes. I can't remember the site -- astro something -- but it actually gave me a really long kind of profile of my kids. I know, it was probably all general and all that, but enough of it rang true that I did actually change the way I did some things based on what it said.

So I guess I'm saying that any parents who cared enough to find out would probably follow it if they had access to something like that. Heck, I'd like to have a blueprint for myself!
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Aug, 2008 08:13 am
boomerang wrote:
I'm glad someone else found it as interesting as I did, FreeDuckl

I do wonder though, if kids came with a blueprint about how to raise them if people would follow it.

If they did follow it would we end up with some very homogenous society?


I really doubt it since there is a lot of genetic diversity -- so there would be a lot of different blueprints advising different things.

I don't know if it could ever be extended to blueprint status though. I mean, it could be "this child is especially resilient" but then what? Send 'em on walkabout and hope that the experiences get very bad but not actually fatal?

I do think the "NOT especially resilient" stuff would be useful, but ultimately I think that's baseline anyway. I'm not sure that anyone who currently neglects or otherwise mistreats a child would be convinced not to if they knew that it would have negative effects -- that is, that's already the baseline assumption, and some messed-up people do messed-up things anyway.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Immortality and Doctor Volkov - Discussion by edgarblythe
Sleep Paralysis - Discussion by Nick Ashley
On the edge and toppling off.... - Discussion by Izzie
Surgery--Again - Discussion by Roberta
PTSD, is it caused by a blow to the head? - Question by Rickoshay75
THE GIRL IS ILL - Discussion by Setanta
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Nature: 1; Nurture: 0
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 05/08/2025 at 11:06:07