hungrythanos414
Diamond
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2024
- Posts
- 1,406
- Reputation
- 2,416
Those studies, you people who throw around the term “genetics”, are referring too, haven't even "studied" genetics. Often genetics is used as a synonym of inheritance, in these epidemiological associative "studies". For example, many doctors will claim heart attacks are "genetic" just because a person, their father, and grandfather etc had them...even though this doesn't prove "genetics" are the reason at all. The cofounding variables like diet( families tend to share the exact same diet...so you would have to prove that the person, father, and grandfather, didn't eat a similar diet, otherwise that's a variable un confounded for), environment ( families share the same environment, so like before you would have to prove they DIDNT share the same environment or a similar one for that matter, or its an unconfounded variable), and the list goes on and on. You cant even show me a picture of a gene strand, just animations on a screen, let alone rDNA, and even if you could…you would have to show it’s gene expression in real time proving its causal effect, which will never happen. Yet something as unobserved as genetics is what causes your looks…not the literal food you nourish your body with?
Last edited: