To be fair, the predictive power of many different polygenic risk models is very low. (Source: doing a PhD in Genetics atm.) So this does not really surprise me

To be fair, the predictive power of many different polygenic risk models is very low. (Source: doing a PhD in Genetics atm.) So this does not really surprise me. Usually about 50% of variance can be explained by genetics, and 50% by environment. Meaning that if you have a good enviromental predictor, such as a zip code, you may be able to predict a trait better, than with genetics, which contain a lot of cryptic relationships that a predictor may not integrate. Its totally fair to be critical of the merit of genetic predictions. Usually they are super bad.