5 ms·

In the article only the negative effects of Neanderthal genes are discussed. Is this because genetic datasets are mostly about gene/diseases correlations, or is

In the article only the negative effects of Neanderthal genes are discussed. Is this because genetic datasets are mostly about gene/diseases correlations, or is it because the researchers did not analyze any gene/benefits datasets? The third option (all Neanderthal genes are bad) does not seem reasonable.

hollerith 11y ago
>In the article only the negative effects of Neanderthal genes are discussed. Actually, that is not true: "It revealed links between Neanderthal DNA and depression, obesity and certain skin disorders, with some variants being associated with an increased risk and others with a reduced risk" (emphasis mine).
sanxiyn 11y ago
From the article: "Using de-identified genome data and medical records from 28,000 hospital patients" I don't know whether there are good gene/benefits datasets, but they used gene/diseases datasets.
allengeorge 11y ago
The article lists a number of positive effects from "archaic genes". Two include: genes that improve the speed of one's immune response, and genes (present in Tibetans) that allows them to live at high altitudes. It's just that the effects aren't always completely positive or negative and, some of the Neanderthal/Denisovian genes have effects that "might be maladaptive today".
digitalzombie 11y ago
They also went to say these "maladvantage" were advantage back in the days but because of today lifestyle they've becomes a hinder. So... they were positive effect but now have become a relic of the past and a burden. edit: Quote: “Many traits that were adaptive 10,000 years ago might be maladaptive today” because of lifestyle, diet and other shifts, notes Rasmus Nielsen, a population geneticist at the University of California, Berkeley.
quot66555 11y ago
If there were notable positive effects, it would likely be danced around, because saying positive things about the groups with Neanderthal admixture is a touchy subject.
- riffraff 11y ago
  could you expand on that? I have never heard of anything like it.
  - iskander 11y ago
    The highest rate of Neanderthal admixture is in East Asians, but there is also a non-trivial rate (2-6%) in most Europeans. The admixture in sub-Saharan Africans is much lower, which creates a risk of any discussion of positive Neanderthal traits pulling in much broader baggage relating to race & genetics.
    - johnchristopher 11y ago
      Fine, but who is eluding the discussions ? PHD in european universities ? The media ? Is research on the subject tabooed and not encouraged ?
      - scottlocklin 11y ago
        What strange planet have you teleported in from? Yes, research on the subject of race is taboo in Western Civilization. Not so much in Asia.
        johnchristopher 11y ago
        I come from Europe (eh). You didn't answer: is that vetoed in public research program or is it the media or the philosophy undergrad who don't know how to deal with the subject and thus avoid it ?
  - oh_sigh 11y ago

hollerith 11y ago

>In the article only the negative effects of Neanderthal genes are discussed. Actually, that is not true: "It revealed links between Neanderthal DNA and depression, obesity and certain skin disorders, with some variants being associated with an increased risk and others with a reduced risk" (emphasis mine).

sanxiyn 11y ago

From the article: "Using de-identified genome data and medical records from 28,000 hospital patients" I don't know whether there are good gene/benefits datasets, but they used gene/diseases datasets.

allengeorge 11y ago

The article lists a number of positive effects from "archaic genes". Two include: genes that improve the speed of one's immune response, and genes (present in Tibetans) that allows them to live at high altitudes. It's just that the effects aren't always completely positive or negative and, some of the Neanderthal/Denisovian genes have effects that "might be maladaptive today".

digitalzombie 11y ago

They also went to say these "maladvantage" were advantage back in the days but because of today lifestyle they've becomes a hinder. So... they were positive effect but now have become a relic of the past and a burden. edit: Quote: “Many traits that were adaptive 10,000 years ago might be maladaptive today” because of lifestyle, diet and other shifts, notes Rasmus Nielsen, a population geneticist at the University of California, Berkeley.

quot66555 11y ago

If there were notable positive effects, it would likely be danced around, because saying positive things about the groups with Neanderthal admixture is a touchy subject.

riffraff 11y ago
could you expand on that? I have never heard of anything like it.
- iskander 11y ago
  The highest rate of Neanderthal admixture is in East Asians, but there is also a non-trivial rate (2-6%) in most Europeans. The admixture in sub-Saharan Africans is much lower, which creates a risk of any discussion of positive Neanderthal traits pulling in much broader baggage relating to race & genetics.
  - johnchristopher 11y ago
    Fine, but who is eluding the discussions ? PHD in european universities ? The media ? Is research on the subject tabooed and not encouraged ?
    - scottlocklin 11y ago
      What strange planet have you teleported in from? Yes, research on the subject of race is taboo in Western Civilization. Not so much in Asia.
      - johnchristopher 11y ago
        I come from Europe (eh). You didn't answer: is that vetoed in public research program or is it the media or the philosophy undergrad who don't know how to deal with the subject and thus avoid it ?
- oh_sigh 11y ago