Genetic IQ

Post Reply New Topic

I got my results back from 23andme genetic testing and it turns out I have a gene that is associated with a lower NonVerbal IQ but higher in others. I wonder if these are consistent with AS:

GG
Subjects' non-verbal IQ performance averaged three points lower.
A study of Dutch families found that rs363050 is associated with "performance IQ" (i.e. non-verbal IQ). Each A at rs363050 increased subjects' performance IQ by an average of three points compared to those with no copies. The authors estimated that rs363050 accounts for 3.4% of the variation in performance IQ between people.

CT
Slightly increased episodic memory.
In this study, the authors asked people to read or listen to lists of words and then recall them later. People with at least one T at rs17070145 performed about 20% better than those with a C at both copies of the SNP five minutes and 24 hours after seeing or hearing the lists. The SNP lies within a gene called KIBRA that is thought to be involved with episodic memory, which involves the recall of events rather than information. (Note: the KIBRA gene is listed in the Genome Explorer as WWC1.)

AA
Much less efficient at learning to avoid errors.
In this study, 26 healthy German subjects took a test that assessed their ability to prefer "correct" choices and avoid "incorrect" ones. The authors also genotyped the subjects at the SNP rs1800497, which is thought to affect a gene involved in dopamine signaling. People with the GG genotype learned to avoid choices associated with negative feedback relatively easily, while people with the AG or AA genotypes did not learn as well to avoid these choices; in other words, they did not learn from their mistakes. (Note: Rs1800497 is commonly referred to in the scientific literature as the DRD2 TaqIA polymorphism. The A version of rs1800497 is equivalent to the A1 allele of DRD2 TaqIA, while the G version of the SNP corresponds to the A2 allele.)

TT
Subjects had the typical nonword reading score.
Nonword reading refers to the ability to read combinations of letter-sounds that don't correspond to actual words. In this study, researchers examined tests of reading ability in young adult twins and siblings of European descent from nearly 800 families. They found that each C at rs11857829 near the DYX1C1 gene (equivalent to rs17819126 reported in the study) was associated with a slightly higher score for nonword reading. The DYX1C1 gene has been previously implicated in developmental dyslexia.

You are not dictated by your genes.

You should ask whether you are consistent with AS, not whether your genes are. Genes are imprecise, because many other factors play roles- environment, other genes, and epigenetic factors being the big three.

Anyway, the last two have no relevance to AS whatsoever. The first two, maybe. But even then, genes associated with certain effects on average across groups of people are irrelevant to an AS diagnosis- what matters is whether these traits present in you!

"I got my results back from 23andme genetic testing and it turns out I have a gene that is associated with a lower NonVerbal IQ but higher in others. I wonder if these are consistent with AS"

AS is about a mixed profile of abilities, and what these abilities are depends on the individual. We tend to be brilliant at some things, but not so good at everything else.

If we listen to the inane social and political commentary of some of our most gifted musicians and actors, it becomes obvious that this is true of the general population as well. It just tends not to be as extreme as it is with aspies.

I have a membership at 23andme, and thought the avoidance of errors had an emotional counterpart. It's normal to get discouraged. You're supposed to feel sad, and quit trying.

I am stubborn. Some people would call it patient or focused.

I don't beat my head against the wall, or do anything masochistic, but I do push myself, well past my physical and mental tolerances, in ways which are ultimately unhealthy.

I removed a couple of trees from hard dirt, within a couple of hours. Loaded them into the trailer, with no help. Kept going well past the point at which my legs were wobbly. The skin on my hands is still growing back, a couple of weeks later, and I've felt pretty sick. People are amazed and ask how did I do that, but it's not good for me.

When I am not so intent on doing the work, I feel as though every blow to my hands was an error, which I did not avoid.

I can name example after example. My joints have healed in ways which don't constantly hurt or look strange, but they are so worn that I probably have an unnatural range of motion, almost like a contortionist.

RS 363050- GG lowered non verbal IQ

RS 17070145 -CT increased memory performance

RS 1800497- CT bad at avoidance of errors

So this means that if you would otherwise have an IQ of 138, RS 363050 GG will give you an IQ of 135, is that right?

The 23 and Me results are interesting. Sometimes it's like they're describing you exactly and other times they're way off.

For example, my toddler has a gene that is associated with people who drink an unusually high amount of coffee. He loves coffee. We both have two red hair genes. We both have red hair.

He and I both have two blue eye genes. Two means you should have blue eyes. He does, I don't. I have brown/green eyes, which is an abnormality, but can happen with a very low percentage of this particular gene pair.

Also, you really can't put too much stock in IQ results, especially if you have a very high or very low score (sorry high IQ people). That just means that you're not average, and as compared to average people it's not accurate. Low could actually mean gifted and the other way around. All you can really say for sure is that low means you're not good at taking the test and high means you're great at taking the test.

AA Subjects' non-verbal IQ performance averaged three points higher.
CC Typical episodic memory.
TT Subjects had the typical nonword reading score.
GG Effectively learns to avoid errors.

Well, I know I have a higher than average non-verbal IQ and all my traits that I know of were really accurate.
I think it's interesting that we've all got a blueprint.

I took the same test and got the same results, as the ones being posted, here.

Incidentally, my dad's old acquaintances have mistaken me for him and called me by his first name.

Every once in awhile, I see someone with a surname related to mine. They look vaguely familiar, say, in the forehead, nose, or cheeks. Transparencies of these images make a perfect match. I realize that they are even making the same faces, oftentimes.

After not talking to my parents, for awhile, I hear them using many of the same figures of speech.

After comparing enough statistics, it wouldn't surprise me, one bit, if geneticists could tell everything about you.

The thing is that 23andme has identified only a small number of the thousands of genes that contribute to IQ.

And as for what it would mean to have some SNPs code for high IQ and some for low - well, that just means you're not at the most extreme tail end of IQ. A person with an IQ of 100 would have roughly half of their IQ-related genes coding for a high IQ and half coding for low IQ. Someone with an IQ of 50 (and no medical syndromes that lower IQ) would have mostly low IQ alleles, while someone with an IQ of 150 would have mostly high IQ alleles.

There's too much emphasis placed on "genes," not enough on the environment.

In this case, I would accept that "genes" PREDISPOSES one to things such as "low nonverbal IQ." However, though I had a borderline nonverbal IQ as a 15 year old adolescent, I was able to achieve, consistently, an average nonverbal IQ in adulthood--through life experience and the use of my cognitive faculties.

Actually, the data suggests that environment affects the IQ of children more strongly than adults. So it may be that your low nonverbal IQ at 15 was environmentally induced, and you've since reached your genetic potential.

Also, sometimes your genes and environment are correlated. For example, one trait associated with IQ is 'need for cognition' - a personality trait where a person enjoys and seeks out mental challenges. Let's imagine need for cognition has a genetic component. (I don't know if it does or not, the research hasn't been done.) A person with high need for cognition would be more likely to give themselves plenty of mental 'exercise', and end up maximizing their genetic potential for IQ. Someone with low need for cognition, meanwhile, would avoid mental exercise whenever they can, and therefore not reach their full potential. This is especially true in adulthood, because children have a lot less choice about their opportunities for mental exercise.

To be honest, I have a moderate "need for cognition" at my best. I have a "lazy intellect," frankly. Maybe that's why I don't go in for philosophy too much (also because I find people who adhere to "isms" rather dogmatic!)

I have learned lots of things, though--through living life, and through study.

Is anyone of the opinion that this is worth the £125 charge?

I am not sure that is correct . If for argument's sake we say FSIQ is VIQ+PIQ/2 (Yes I know it doesn't work that way for those with a significant gap between the two) then VIQ 138 PIQ 138= 138 VIQ 138 PIQ 135(3 of for GG)= 136.5.

As my performance IQ is around 75 according to JCTI(77) and Mensa Hungary(73) I would say there must be more genes affecting performance IQ.