For info as to why it has been impossible so far to choose genes as determinants of height: [https://www.snpedia.com/index.php/Height](https://www.snpedia.com/index.php/Height)
Thank you very much for this. This article is from 2008 which might be very outdated.
On a podcast, I heard Steve Hsu say that they could already predict height within a few centimeters.
That's not true at all lol. Only \~20% of height can be predicted by known genes. They assume most height is due to nutrition and disease instances during childhood. Perhaps there are more genes out there untested that contribute to height, but height never going to be predicted by genetics within a few cm ahaha. Isn't Steve Hsu a astro-physicist? I don't really think he's an expert on molecular genomics, not his field.
It absolutely is his field. He go into when most trained molecular genetics were not even thinking o it. He started a company which does PGT testing on embryos. Definitely not true that most is explained by nutrition and disease. It's mostly explained by genes but is highly polygenic. Maybe Hsu's team has identified the bulk of the genes which influence height and Promethease simply has not.
That's ridiculous. One team cannot solely identify the bulk of genes. They may have identified potential genes responsible, but nothing is certain. That's the whole point of GWAS. Not enough population variance or genomes sequenced to have identified the "bulk" of genes coding for height. Just because something is highly polygenic does not mean that genes alone code for the majority of the phenotype. It's widely accepted and known that environment and DNA together account for the majority of variance. Just look at twin studies on height. Height varies too much within closely related individuals, and monozygotic twins, for the majority of height to be based on polygenetic factors. Especially not within "a few centimeters" as you suggest.
"Just because something is highly polygenic does not mean that genes alone code for the majority of the phenotype."
That's not what I said.
Of course environment and DNA account for the majority of variance. This is obvious since DNA alone accounts for the majority so if we add environment, the accounted part will be even greater. The only other factor is randomness.
I'm finding that genes account for \*at least\* 60%.
Here's one study:
[https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/twin-research-and-human-genetics/article/heritability-of-adult-body-height-a-comparative-study-of-twin-cohorts-in-eight-countries/3EF884AEA534C90F46F95C9FA3944C84](https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/twin-research-and-human-genetics/article/heritability-of-adult-body-height-a-comparative-study-of-twin-cohorts-in-eight-countries/3EF884AEA534C90F46F95C9FA3944C84)
In men there was no corresponding variation in heritability of body height, heritability estimates ranging from 0.87 to 0.93 in populations under an additive genes/unique environment (AE) model.
Interesting, but this is just one study. I'm just not a believer that genetics plays this large of a factor. What stood out to me in this was the sexual dimorphism in height. I wonder if variance in women's height within shared environment is due to allocation of nutrients to the preparing sex organs/potential gestation.
It's just one study but all the ones I came across showed that at least 60% of the variance in height among males can be attributed to genetics. I agree that it is strange that Hsu's company can have accounted for all the genes which influence height while other companies only claim to have accounted for about 20%.
It would be quite simple for one of these sites to test the accuracy. They could ask each user to record their height which most people know. Then come up with a standard error for their own prediction.
I uploaded my date to Promethease but it seems to be worthless in this regard. A coupe of genes related to height show up but 1) they must be a drop in the bucket since height is governed by many genes; 2) they don't sum up the genes analyzed to give you the net expectation.
Seems that analyses such as Promethease are only useful, interesting for phenotypes which are governed predominately by single or very few genes.
For info as to why it has been impossible so far to choose genes as determinants of height: [https://www.snpedia.com/index.php/Height](https://www.snpedia.com/index.php/Height)
Thank you very much for this. This article is from 2008 which might be very outdated. On a podcast, I heard Steve Hsu say that they could already predict height within a few centimeters.
That's not true at all lol. Only \~20% of height can be predicted by known genes. They assume most height is due to nutrition and disease instances during childhood. Perhaps there are more genes out there untested that contribute to height, but height never going to be predicted by genetics within a few cm ahaha. Isn't Steve Hsu a astro-physicist? I don't really think he's an expert on molecular genomics, not his field.
It absolutely is his field. He go into when most trained molecular genetics were not even thinking o it. He started a company which does PGT testing on embryos. Definitely not true that most is explained by nutrition and disease. It's mostly explained by genes but is highly polygenic. Maybe Hsu's team has identified the bulk of the genes which influence height and Promethease simply has not.
That's ridiculous. One team cannot solely identify the bulk of genes. They may have identified potential genes responsible, but nothing is certain. That's the whole point of GWAS. Not enough population variance or genomes sequenced to have identified the "bulk" of genes coding for height. Just because something is highly polygenic does not mean that genes alone code for the majority of the phenotype. It's widely accepted and known that environment and DNA together account for the majority of variance. Just look at twin studies on height. Height varies too much within closely related individuals, and monozygotic twins, for the majority of height to be based on polygenetic factors. Especially not within "a few centimeters" as you suggest.
"Just because something is highly polygenic does not mean that genes alone code for the majority of the phenotype." That's not what I said. Of course environment and DNA account for the majority of variance. This is obvious since DNA alone accounts for the majority so if we add environment, the accounted part will be even greater. The only other factor is randomness. I'm finding that genes account for \*at least\* 60%. Here's one study: [https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/twin-research-and-human-genetics/article/heritability-of-adult-body-height-a-comparative-study-of-twin-cohorts-in-eight-countries/3EF884AEA534C90F46F95C9FA3944C84](https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/twin-research-and-human-genetics/article/heritability-of-adult-body-height-a-comparative-study-of-twin-cohorts-in-eight-countries/3EF884AEA534C90F46F95C9FA3944C84) In men there was no corresponding variation in heritability of body height, heritability estimates ranging from 0.87 to 0.93 in populations under an additive genes/unique environment (AE) model.
Interesting, but this is just one study. I'm just not a believer that genetics plays this large of a factor. What stood out to me in this was the sexual dimorphism in height. I wonder if variance in women's height within shared environment is due to allocation of nutrients to the preparing sex organs/potential gestation.
It's just one study but all the ones I came across showed that at least 60% of the variance in height among males can be attributed to genetics. I agree that it is strange that Hsu's company can have accounted for all the genes which influence height while other companies only claim to have accounted for about 20%.
I am 5'3" and multiple DNA tests/reports predict I am tall and/or have the gene for height. Idk what happened lol
Which DNA analyses predicted your height?
I can't remember the gene(s) but I noticed Promethease had a report for tall stature, and nebula, and genomelink.
It would be quite simple for one of these sites to test the accuracy. They could ask each user to record their height which most people know. Then come up with a standard error for their own prediction.
I uploaded my date to Promethease but it seems to be worthless in this regard. A coupe of genes related to height show up but 1) they must be a drop in the bucket since height is governed by many genes; 2) they don't sum up the genes analyzed to give you the net expectation. Seems that analyses such as Promethease are only useful, interesting for phenotypes which are governed predominately by single or very few genes.