Monday, May 16, 2016

Scientists want to de-fund genomic research

A Nature mag article says:
The findings have proved divisive. Some researchers hope that the work will aid studies of biology, medicine and social policy, but others say that the emphasis on genetics obscures factors that have a much larger impact on individual attainment, such as health, parenting and quality of schooling.

“Policymakers and funders should pull the plug on this sort of work,” said anthropologist Anne Buchanan and genetic anthropologist Kenneth Weiss at Pennsylvania State University in University Park in a statement to Nature. “We gain little that is useful in our understanding of this sort of trait by a massively large genetic approach in normal individuals.”
This is probably the world's leading science journal, and it suggests suppressing science research? What goes?

I don't think that there is any proof that health, parenting, and quality of schooling do have larger impact on individual attainment. We would certainly need some research to determine that. But this Nature article is against the research.

I can only assume that Nature mag is infected with a leftist ideology, as this is the sort of thing that Marxists would say.

2 comments:

Matthew Cory said...

People like Robert Plomin have already done a lot of this research. However, genomics is overrated.
http://backwardations.blogspot.com/2016/02/the-human-genome-project-scam_20.html

Rainer B said...

I can understand if scientists want to block research when the results go aginst the purpose of science. However such is not the case.
The climate science that claims there's a global warming problem goes against the purpose of science. The greatest thing science has ever achieved was the Industrial Revolution with all the technology it brought us. The technology that causes carbondioxide emissions is an important chuck of this technology. It's the purpose of science to uphold this technology and the climate science that says we must reduce our emissions goes against this goal. So I could really understand if scientists would want such research blocked. Yet I hear crickets.
But the science about the genome doesn't go against the purpose or meaning of science. It's not against the purpose of science to find out it's more nature than nurture that shapes us. It's not against the purpose to find out we shouldn't let a lot of racially alien people into white countries. I have to refuse to understand why some scientists would want to block THIS research.