News

Study finds interest in screening embryos for education propensity, especially if everyone else is doing it

Science could allow parents to select for taller, smarter kids.

False hope for instilling disease resistance and desirable traits?

This article questions the use of polygenic risk scoring to screen embryos for IVF. The new genetic technology aims to reduce disease risks but current models have limitations and uncertainties.

Genetic testing with IVF is being marketed as a means to choose a healthy embryo, despite questions about the soundness of the technology

Dr. F Perry Wilson of the Yale Medical School discuss Polygenic Risk Scores

The article examines using polygenic scoring during IVF to select embryos. Researchers warn of limitations and that companies overstate abilities. As the science advances, disparities may grow without guidance on ethics and policy to ensure informed consent as the technology evolves.

The report underscores the concern that applying genetic research to develop risk scores and select embryos for IVF might be imperfect.

Companies are selling reports about a wide range of physical, cognitive, and behavioral traits to consumers based on their genomic data, but such tests have a number of limitations.

The New York Times Magazine article provides background on the origins of social-science genetics, and presents several viewpoints on ethical dilemmas faced by those working in the field.

The Vox article provides a primer on GWAS and discusses appropriate interpretations of the findings from our study titled “Gene discovery and polygenic prediction from a genome-wide association study of educational attainment in 1.1 million individuals."

The Atlantic article draws attention to the findings and appropriate interpretations of these findings for our study titled “Gene discovery and polygenic prediction from a genome-wide association study of educational attainment in 1.1 million individuals."

The Welt article summarizes the findings of our study titled “Gene discovery and polygenic prediction from a genome-wide association study of educational attainment in 1.1 million individuals" and discusses its implications in a broad context.

The New York Times article draws attention to the findings for our study titled “Gene discovery and polygenic prediction from a genome-wide association study of educational attainment in 1.1 million individuals." The article includes remarks from several of the authors on the study's implications and avenues for future research.

The MIT Technology Review article summarizes the findings of our study titled “Gene discovery and polygenic prediction from a genome-wide association study of educational attainment in 1.1 million individuals" and includes comments from the paper's authors and other researchers on its implications.

The Atlantic article draws attention to the findings and appropriate interpretations of these findings for our study titled “Genome-wide association study identifies 74 loci associated with educational attainment."

The STAT article highlights the findings from our study titled “Genome-wide association study identifies 74 loci associated with educational attainment" and emphasizes that although there are genes with significant associations with educational attainment, "underlining how a complex behavior like going to college is not written in our DNA."

The Psyblog article introduces the findings of our study titled "Genetic variants associated with subjective well-being, depressive symptoms and neuroticism identified through genome-wide analyses," including some remarks about the interpretations of these findings from a few of the authors.

The Forbes article draws attention to our study titled "Genetic variants associated with subjective well-being, depressive symptoms and neuroticism identified through genome-wide analyses."

In November 2014, the Hastings Center, the well-known independent bioethics research institute, convened a workshop to examine the ethics of research on the genetics of intelligence. In September 2015, the Hastings Center Report published the results of that workshop in a special issue, "The Genetics of Intelligence: Ethics and the Conduct of Trustworthy Research." In introducing the issue, the co-editors wrote:

"Despite . . . concern and skepticism, no one at our workshop argued that such research should come to a halt. Rather, we heard that the right response to research into the genetics of general cognitive ability was to ensure that that research is done in a way that is 'trustworthy.'” The third of three features of trustworthy research the workshop members identified "entails taking steps to guard against hyperbole about its scientific or social significance. . . . Fortunately, efforts at guarding against hyperbole are already under way. In 2013, a group of researchers—the Social Science Genetic Association Consortium—published an article in Science on three genetic variants that are associated with educational attainment (which they took to be a proxy for intelligence) and simultaneously posted an essay that explained in plain English how the study was conducted and what it did—and did not—find. They explained why they had not found 'the gene for educational attainment' and why it would be 'extremely premature' to infer policy implications from their findings. . . . [T]he SSGAC may be the best example of prophylaxis against hyperbole to which we can point . ."

The Wall Street Journal article draws attention to our study titled “GWAS of 126,559 Individuals Identifies Genetic Variants Associated with Educational Attainment” and highlights its conclusion that “educational attainment looks to be a very polygenic trait".

An editorial in Nature discussed the SSGAC as best practice approach to research in behavioral genetics and stated that "scientists would do well to follow the example of the Social Science Genetic Association Consortium." At the SSGAC, we release FAQs with our publications to explain both the results and limitations of our studies to avoid any misinterpretation of our work.

The article in Science highlights the progress the SSGAC is making “toward identifying genes underlying variation in educational attainment” by “capitalizing on the wide availability of very crude phenotypic measures to identify genes robustly associated with an outcome of broad social relevance”, and then analyzing these genes with the “knowledge that they are associated with something, even if it isn’t known exactly what or how."

Futurity explains our recent work on educational attainment, quoting one of the study's co-authors, Dalton Conley:

“We have now taken a small but important first step toward identifying the specific genetic variants that predict educational attainment. Armed with this knowledge, we can now begin to examine how other factors—including public policy, parental roles, and economic status—dampen or amplify genetic effects and ultimately devise better remedies to bolster educational outcomes.”

The Chronicle discusses the SSGAC's work on educational attainment, noting that, "The researchers were careful to note that they have not discovered "the gene for education" and that these findings somehow [do not] imply that a person's educational attainment is determined at birth."

The Chronicle of Higher Education discusses the origins and possible implications of our work on educational attainment. The article highlights that while “there will never be a gene for educational success”, the SSGAC demonstrates that “genoeconomists are ready to play at a higher level, and everyone should start listening”.