What percentage does genetics play in health?

Updated on : January 17, 2022 by Michaela Finley



What percentage does genetics play in health?

Humans are genetically determined for most of their lifespan and their disease profile throughout life. This is no different than a plant in a field.

Wheat, for example, planted in the fall, will sprout in the spring and mature and die exactly a certain number of degree-days (heat problem) later. Humans have a similar genetic clock in them. The clock varies with the person because it is not determined by species but by individual composition.

Similarly, resistance to disease is determined by genetics. For example, many presume that breast cancer is due to a genetic defect. It is not like this. The genet

Keep reading

Humans are genetically determined for most of their lifespan and their disease profile throughout life. This is no different than a plant in a field.

Wheat, for example, planted in the fall, will sprout in the spring and mature and die exactly a certain number of degree-days (heat problem) later. Humans have a similar genetic clock in them. The clock varies with the person because it is not determined by species but by individual composition.

Similarly, resistance to disease is determined by genetics. For example, many presume that breast cancer is due to a genetic defect. It is not like this. Genetics impart immunity to certain viruses. Genes for "breast cancer" just don't really provide immunity. The problem of breast cancer then becomes a problem of statistical encounter with the virus. A person who is not found with the virus will not get breast cancer.

Genetics are determined enough to predict that a person will have certain diseases that will affect them in certain ways. We can predict that your teeth will have certain problems. It goes on and on. However, genetics are not completely determined by all things.

If your genetics define you to a specific maximum lifespan, you won't pass it. Life events can shorten this a lot. Genetics determine the performance conditions of the outer limits. You cannot exceed genetics.

Immunity to disease, for example, is limited in antibodies to being able to formulate only a certain list of antibodies. It is a very long list, but you cannot become immune to a disease that you do not produce antibodies to and this list is predetermined by your genetics. You can derive many assumptions from this. The question of how this list was determined and updated is an unresolved issue in immunology.

Genetics will determine all the outer limits of the life cycle. Experience and care can bring you closer to those limits. I suppose in time we can find ways to alter this set of limitations. The wisdom of doing so can be curious.

It is difficult to say.

Obviously, some people are born with genetic conditions that affect their health, even something as seemingly minor as a slight difference in fat metabolism.

Your access to healthy food and healthcare makes a big difference. We can see this by comparing life expectancy over time - same gene pool, different living conditions.

Some people do not take sufficient care of themselves even when they know they are susceptible to certain problems. If your doctor tells you that you need to lower your blood pressure with diet and exercise, you really should take that advice.

So this

Keep reading

It is difficult to say.

Obviously, some people are born with genetic conditions that affect their health, even something as seemingly minor as a slight difference in fat metabolism.

Your access to healthy food and healthcare makes a big difference. We can see this by comparing life expectancy over time - same gene pool, different living conditions.

Some people do not take sufficient care of themselves even when they know they are susceptible to certain problems. If your doctor tells you that you need to lower your blood pressure with diet and exercise, you really should take that advice.

Then there is luck. Your health could be irrevocably altered when you are hit by a truck. Wrong place, wrong time.

Here is a book on the subject. Recovery of the American Indian Population in the 20th Century: Amazon.com: Nancy Shoemaker: Books

Here is a review and overview of the main points of the book. H-Net Reviews

In 2010 there were 1,969,167 registered tribal members. In 1900 there were 237,196 Native Americans. You are correct that a portion of the larger number in the current census may include people who feel they have tribal roots but have little connection. I'm not sure what you mean by "genetic population". Ethnic groups and race are not determined by genetics. Obama is genetically 50/50

Keep reading

Here is a book on the subject. Recovery of the American Indian Population in the 20th Century: Amazon.com: Nancy Shoemaker: Books

Here is a review and overview of the main points of the book. H-Net Reviews

In 2010 there were 1,969,167 registered tribal members. In 1900 there were 237,196 Native Americans. You are correct that a portion of the larger number in the current census may include people who feel they have tribal roots but have little connection. I'm not sure what you mean by "genetic population". Ethnic groups and race are not determined by genetics. Obama is genetically 50/50 African and white. But he is ethnically African American or black. Membership of a tribe was determined in many different ways by tribes. They can establish their own definitions. But no tribe allows people to be adopted or unite if they are not described by Native Americans. But the tribal inscription is definitely lower than the actual Native American ancestry. From the 1940s to the early 1960s, there were programs to wipe out tribes and relocate tribal members to urban areas. Especially under the Indian Relocation Act of 1956, but earlier the Bureau of Indian Affairs initiated the program and assigned relocation workers to Oklahoma, New Mexico, California, Arizona, Utah and Colorado, officially extending the program to all Indians the following year. . In 1955, additional BIA relocation offices were added in Cleveland, Dallas, Minneapolis, Oklahoma City, St. Louis, the San Francisco Bay Area, San Jose, Seattle, and Tulsa. Approximately 750,000 people moved from native lands to urban areas at this time.

In any case, I would say that a growth of about 200,000 to 2 million in 100 years is a rapid growth rate.

http://www.bia.gov/cs/groups/public/documents/text/idc1-024782.pdf

The vast majority of people think so, but I have my doubts.

The first and foremost reason I doubt this is because the level of autism seems to increase from one generation to the next. It seems that most of the time we see people who have some autistic traits give birth to children with high functioning autism and people with high functioning autism give birth to people with more severe autism.

There are exceptions, but it is much more common for the level of autism to increase from one generation to the next. If this were genetic, we should be seeing the same degree of autism from the father in his son.

I know

Keep reading

The vast majority of people think so, but I have my doubts.

The first and foremost reason I doubt this is because the level of autism seems to increase from one generation to the next. It seems that most of the time we see people who have some autistic traits give birth to children with high functioning autism and people with high functioning autism give birth to people with more severe autism.

There are exceptions, but it is much more common for the level of autism to increase from one generation to the next. If this were genetic, we should be seeing the same degree of autism from the father in his son.

Second, autism is a very complex condition. If it is genetic, it is the case that there is a gene that allows other genes to express themselves, leading to a series of behaviors, or that all the symptoms of autism can be traced to a single trait caused by a single gene. The research is far from conclusive.

Third, there is no definitive study to trace autism down to a set of genes. Until we have that, I think we should remain open to other explanations.

Now I am going to speculate.

It could be epigenetic: certain hormonal activity of the mother during pregnancy can cause certain traits in the newborn. This would mean that autism could be caused by certain hormonal disturbances, not by genetic factors.

The theory of causes of autism that I favor is that it is caused by something that happens during the first 2 years of life. Here why I think so:

There are many studies that say that personality traits are caused by certain events during this crucial part of childhood development. For example, substance abuse is believed to be related to how a baby initially reacted to the first stressful situations in his life. If the response to a stressful situation is faulty, then the person is much more likely to "medicate" to deal with stress later in life, rather than react in a healthy way.

Autism is a developmental disorder. I think that part is clear. A baby simply won't develop social skills at the age those early social skills are supposed to develop. Social skills develop after birth. If for some reason a baby is not motivated to develop them, they are likely to remain defective for the rest of his life.

Also, in most cases of high-functioning autism, it is invisible for the first two years of life. Many on the high-functioning end experience no delay in language acquisition. The disorder begins at the age when social behavior is supposed to be learned.

What I am saying is in no way an accusation of parents. It could be that the infant feels a certain security during infancy that takes away the motivation to develop social skills. Much learning occurs in response to a problem, so it could be that a particular trait does not develop due to a lack of negative motivation.

If we think that parenting styles have become much "kinder" than the harsh parenting techniques of the past, this could be one reason for the increase in severe autism. I'm not saying that being rude is the solution, just that we must be careful not to be too complacent. I don't think anyone would doubt that parents care a lot about their children today. In the past, only royalty and aristocracy really cared about their offspring, while average people had very difficult lives, with much less time to spend with their children. The children had many problems that they needed to solve on their own, because the parents simply did not have time to attend to their needs. The increase in time,

Learning to communicate through language, for example, sometimes needs help by not giving the child what he wants unless he uses words. If a child is always given what he wants with other ways of asking, he may develop faulty communication skills. Language acquisition may be delayed. What is innate to human communication is the use of symbolic behaviors to obtain the desired result. If parents adapt to the symbols that a child initially comes up with to obtain the desired result, they can develop their communication skills using symbols other than the parent's language.

If language acquisition were just genetic, then we would all be speaking the same language everywhere on earth. But we don't. The only thing innate is the use of symbols, not what symbols are used.

Behaviors learned (or NOT learned) during the first 2 years of life can function as genetic factors. If something is not learned at the right age, it is very likely that it will never develop normally afterwards.

This does NOT blame the parents! As I said, it could be a lack of negative motivation that prevents learning; it does not mean that the father is a bad father.

Also, if the cause of autism is a certain lack of negative parenting motivation (because the father is too accommodating and tolerant, which basically says that the father is too loving and too kind), this could also lead to It counts having a certain degree of autism in more children of the same parent and would also explain why some children have autism even if no one else in the family has it.

I come from a family where I am the only person with autism, while my dad only had some of the traits (certainly not enough for the diagnosis) and my mom had a few other traits. Not only are my parents not autistic, but neither of my cousins ​​nor my second and third cousins. I really am the only one and I experience all the abnormalities of autism: frequent collapses, hyposensitivity to a certain category of substances and hypersensitivity to others, abnormal eating and sleeping habits, all kinds of digestive problems, quite extreme hyposensitivity to physical pain, hypersensitivity to sensory perception, amazing ability to concentrate, and finding memorizing random things to be extremely fun, etc.

I am fully aware that almost everyone is sure that autism is genetic, but I know that the studies are inconclusive. Until we are absolutely sure, I think we should keep an open mind and not be 100% sure of any statement. If we are 100% sure, then no further investigation is necessary.

All we really have as proof of the genetic theory is the incidence of autism within the same family. Given that there are other possible explanations for this occurrence, I really don't think that proof is sufficient.

So the main thing I want to say is that more research is needed on the causes and that there could be explanations other than genetics. I am not saying that it is not genetic, I am just saying that there is another plausible explanation of causes and reasons to doubt the theory of genetic inheritance.

My genetics are exceptional.

I'm from the stupid branch of an extremely brilliant family of scientists, although I still have an IQ of around 140. I don't have their intelligence, but I also don't have some of the crippling emotional problems that some in that branch of the family have, so I consider it a good compensation. My family tree also has a long lifespan, with many over 90 and some over 100.

Turns out, I'm the second strongest woman in my Crossfit gym, without trying too hard. Crossfit is a new thing for me, especially cardio, although I have been lifting for a while. Within a couple of months

Keep reading

My genetics are exceptional.

I'm from the stupid branch of an extremely brilliant family of scientists, although I still have an IQ of around 140. I don't have their intelligence, but I also don't have some of the crippling emotional problems that some in that branch of the family have, so I consider it a good compensation. My family tree also has a long lifespan, with many over 90 and some over 100.

Turns out, I'm the second strongest woman in my Crossfit gym, without trying too hard. Crossfit is a new thing for me, especially cardio, although I have been lifting for a while. In a couple of months, now I keep up with the rest of the class during the conditioning part, but a boy who started at the same time as me and was on the same level of bad at the beginning, is still struggling. My body responds very well to training.

I don't work a lot for money and I know that it is much more difficult for the people around me to do the same work. While they do not pay me mega dollars, it is more than enough to live in a beautiful area 5 minutes walk from the beach and 10 minutes drive from the CBD in a fairly expensive city. My zip code is my main concession to the fact that I'm actually fine, although I don't really feel like it, and I have pretty simple tastes. Now I am in the habit of saying that I live in the next suburb, because of the reactions I get from other people about where I live.

The negative is a measure of social and emotional immaturity, as a result of being a freak growing up. Laziness, from not having to work hard, knowing at the same time how less intelligent I was compared to my family, knowing that I could never compare no matter how hard I tried. Less feminine body type for an Asian person, but since I don't live in Asia I get a lot of praise for my physique and I probably wouldn't have the physical strength otherwise, I agree with that. As I get older, I appreciate more how easy life is for me compared to other people, and I am grateful for that.

Well, I just went through some scientific papers for you. This one is good: http://www.cell.com/current-biology/pdf/S0960-9822(13)00844-0.pdf

Let me summarize for you. We'll assume that IQ is a good measure of intelligence (but is it really?)

  1. What is intelligence? According to Linda Gottfredson: “Intelligence is a very general mental capacity that, among other things, involves the ability to reason, plan, solve problems, think abstractly, understand complex ideas, learn quickly, and learn from experience. It's not just about learning a book, limited academic skill, or test-taking knowledge. Morning
Keep reading

Well, I just went through some scientific papers for you. This one is good: http://www.cell.com/current-biology/pdf/S0960-9822(13)00844-0.pdf

Let me summarize for you. We'll assume that IQ is a good measure of intelligence (but is it really?)

  1. What is intelligence? According to Linda Gottfredson: “Intelligence is a very general mental capacity that, among other things, involves the ability to reason, plan, solve problems, think abstractly, understand complex ideas, learn quickly, and learn from experience. It's not just about learning a book, limited academic skill, or test-taking knowledge. Rather, it reflects a broader and deeper ability to understand our surroundings: 'grasp', 'make sense' of things, or 'figure out' what to do. "
  2. Is intelligence hereditary? From testing twins and adopted children, we can try to establish if there is any hereditary factor in intelligence. The percentage of the variation in intelligence explained by genetic causes is generally around 50%. Regarding the environment, twin studies suggest that the shared environment's contribution to intelligence differences is small, even negligible, in adulthood, and that what is not genetic is largely due to an environment. not shared and a measurement error. Interestingly, there is about a 30% correlation between intelligence test scores and overall brain size. As of yet, it is not understood what bigger brains have that are associated with being brighter.

In response to your initial question, your test most likely shows an IQ close to that of your mother and sister. It's hard to say exactly what the range will be and with what confidence, but I would expect something above 130.

To find out the meaning of IQ scores, I wrote a blog post about IQ tests recently: What does an IQ of 120 mean?

Although this is clearly a troll question, I'll start by answering your question right away: Yes, Albanians are genetically European / White. If they weren't European or white, what would they be?

If you meet an Albanian, you will see an undoubtedly white person whom you immediately perceive as such. For people who are not familiar with our ethnicity but who are familiar with our appearance, they almost always mistake us for other Mediterranean people such as Italians or Greeks.

NOTE before continuing: Albanians are native to Southeastern Europe and speak an Indo-European language; however, they are linguisti

Keep reading

Although this is clearly a troll question, I'll start by answering your question right away: Yes, Albanians are genetically European / White. If they weren't European or white, what would they be?

If you meet an Albanian, you will see an undoubtedly white person whom you immediately perceive as such. For people who are not familiar with our ethnicity but who are familiar with our appearance, they almost always mistake us for other Mediterranean people such as Italians or Greeks.

NOTE before continuing: Albanians are native to Southeastern Europe and speak an Indo-European language; however, they are linguistically and genetically unique compared to the surrounding Slavs, who predate them in the region by more than a thousand years. In the following text, I use the terms 'white' and 'European' interchangeably (as is commonplace), instead of using the obscure and unfamiliar Americanized formal notion of 'Caucasian' / 'white', which includes the inhabitants of the Middle East and North. Africans.

Take a look at this humorous article by Robert Lindsay in which he pokes fun at neo-Nazis and white supremacists who call Albanians and other southern Europeans "non-white."

It is important to note that the "Europeanness" or "whiteness" of Albanians is not a subject of dispute in the academic world (the world of facts and research), yet it has gained prominence on the Internet. Certain users on racist and non-educational forum sites like Stormfront promote such ideas; usually ultra-nationalist Serbs or Greeks struggling to portray Albanians as Turks or foreigners to the Balkans (another tactic most used to reclaim Albanian-inhabited soil).

These uneducated or simply Albanian people base their arguments solely on the fact that many Albanians converted to Islam during the five centuries of Ottoman occupation of Southeast Europe. This dark era in Albanian history resulted in 38% -60% (numbers vary) of Albania's population identifying as culturally Muslim today.

Albanian Muslim boys celebrating Eid in the capital of Tirana

- All the confusion around religion and blood (ie ethnicity) can lead to the following scenario: an Albanian is considered white until they expose that he is Muslim or simply Albanian; so some people, who are not used to seeing European / white Muslims, but are very used to seeing Arab or other Asian Muslims, may speculate or even conclude that Albanians must also be non-European (simply because of their religious background ). Such a complicated situation is undoubtedly the result of a lack of research on the part of non-Albanians.

Before we get into more complicated information, here is a simple map:

As you can see, the people of Albania have lighter hair and eye pigmentation than those of Greece, southern Italy, and most of Spain. Hair and eye pigmentation in Albania is roughly the same as in northern Italy and most of France. This map by renowned American anthropologist Carleton S. Coon is quite old, but it still gives the reader an overview of phenotypes in Europe.

Upon…

  • Genetics:

Studies in genetic anthropology show that Albanians share similar ancestry to other Europeans.

The geography of recent genetic ancestry in Europe

Maternal and paternal lineages in Albania and the genetic makeup of Indo-European populations

Y chromosome evidence of cultural diffusion of agriculture in southeastern Europe

High-resolution phylogenetic analysis of southeastern Europe tracks important episodes of paternal gene flow between Slavic populations | Molecular Biology and Evolution | Oxford Scholar

  • Nothing in our genetic makeup links us to regions outside of Europe.

The mainland of Greece, including the Peloponnese, appears to be slightly differentiated, grouped together with the other southern Balkan populations of Albania and Kosovo. Finally, the North Central Balkan groups (speaking South Slavs and Romanians) show an affinity with Eastern Europeans.

Ancient and recent mixing layers in Sicily and southern Italy trace multiple migration routes along the Mediterranean

Y-DNA (paternal lineage):

The three most common haplogroups among Albanians are J2b2, E-V13, and R1b and all are native European haplogroups. Within the Balkans, all three have a local peak in Albanians (specifically from Kosovo), and are generally more common among Albanians, Greeks, and Wallachians than South Slavs.

J and E were brought to Europe with Neolithic farmers approx. 8000 years ago (the same guys who brought the gene for white skin to the continent). Haplogroup E-V13 originated (mutated) somewhere in the Balkans more than 3000 years ago.

Furthermore, the E-V13 haplogroup is the only Neolithic haplogroup found in all of Europe.

Haplogroup J2 is concentrated in the Balkans (and is common in Italy), however, J2b itself is quite rare outside the ethnic Albanian territory (where it is around 14-16%), but can also be found at frequencies of 9% between Romanians and Greeks.

  • It is also worth mentioning that the three haplogroups so typical of today's Albanians were also found in ancient Neolithic and Bronze Age remains off the eastern coast of the Adriatic (ancient Illyria). See the picture below :)

The genomic history of Southeast Europe


Below are two representations of various European populations and their respective ancestry ratios for the three European genetic ancestral populations. Albanians are naturally included (because they are genetically European).

  • We are not a very mixed population (less mixed than all other southern European populations). How then could we be Serbo-Greek-Turkish hybrids as many Serbian quora users seem to believe?

By far the highest rates of descent identity (IBD) within any population are found among Albanians. The Albanians evaluated (from Albania and Kosovo) had around 90 ancestors from 0 to 500 years old, and around 600 ancestors from 500 to 1500 years old (so high that they were left out of certain numbers in the study), which suggests that today's Albanian speakers are descended from a relatively small and cohesive population that has recently and rapidly expanded over the past 1,500 years.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3646727/

https://www.genomeweb.com/archive/modern-europeans-share-number-recent-genetic-ancestors

This historical period of expansion surprisingly coincides with Albanian ethnogenesis, where native tribes who had taken refuge in the mountains of Dardania emerged, at the beginning of the first millennium, to reconquer the Illyrian plains that had been colonized by migrating Slavs. Here's what Cambridge professor Noel Malcolm has to say about Albanian ethnogenesis:

The Albanians as we know them today first appear in the historical record in 1043, when Albanian troops appear fighting alongside the Greeks in the army of a rebellious Byzantine general ...

But if Illyria survived as an Albanian, she did so only through physical contraction, withdrawal, and isolation, which naturally would have taken place in mountainous terrain. This is why the purest element of Albanian vocabulary refers to mountains, high-altitude plants, and grazing: the point is not that proto-Albanians have never lived any other kind of life, but that the only ones who survived as Albanian speakers did. so precisely because that was the kind of isolated and independent life they led, probably for several centuries. Illyrians living on the coastal plains were Romanized, as were those on the Dalmatian coast, and indeed in most areas of Yugoslavia. When the Slavs began to arrive in the 6th century,

So the remaining natives of the Western Balkans came very close to disappearing and it is a miracle that a very small founding population created the Albanian people. This explains the genetic homogeneity observed in Albanians.

Finally, regarding the apparent Turkish or Middle Eastern mix:

The few uneducated people who argue that Albanians are not European suggest that they are simply remnants of the Ottoman occupation (descendants of settlers) or that they emigrated from the Caucasus, while every piece of linguistic and genetic evidence points to a peninsula origin. the Balkans. (probably in the Western Balkans).

“One aspect of these stories needs to be clarified. At first glance, it may seem that an alien element took over at all levels, not only when it came to ruling power, but with the introduction of Muslim inhabitants and the growing dominance of corsairs. This impression is false. With a few exceptions (soldiers and a few others), Muslims were not immigrants brought from distant Islamic territories; they were local Albanians who converted to Islam. The reasons for conversion were various and, in many cases, probably had more to do with the advancement of a person's social and economic position than with religious concerns. But although the Albanian Muslims had some legal advantages, they did not form anything like a separate caste,

- Excerpt from page 14 of the book Agents of Empire by Noel Malcolm

“The massive colonization by Turkish settlers was something exceptional in the Balkans, confined to a few areas of Bulgaria, Thrace and Macedonia; It did not touch Kosovo, Albania or any of the northern Slavic lands. "

- P. 94 from Kosovo: A Brief History of the English Historian and Scholar Noel Malcolm.

Genetics once again:

"In our ibd analysis, we also found no evidence of a specific gene flow from the Middle East to Kosovar Albanians, compared to non-Muslim populations in the Western Balkans (Figure 7)."

Basically, being an Albanian Muslim or a Bosnian does not increase the chances of having non-European ancestry. All Balkan peoples have roughly the same amount of mixture (if any) and this will be higher in areas that were colonized by Asian Turkish settlers during the Ottoman period (Bulgaria, FYROM, Northern Greece, etc.)

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0105090

Below are two principal component analysis graphs illustrating how genetically related Albanians are to certain populations in Europe:

From the article: Genetic Inheritance of Balto-Slavic Speaking Populations: A Synthesis of Autosomal, Mitochondrial, and Y Chromosomal Data

From the article: Situation at the gateway to Europe: The genetic makeup of Western Balkan populations based on autosomal and haploid markers

Recreational DNA testing:

Based on my observations (online), Albanians who take any DNA test get an average score of 100% in Europe. In this online spreadsheet with European AncestryDNA results compiled by Tracing African Roots, you can see what Albanians and other populations typically get in company tests. While you are in the spreadsheet, feel free to compare the Albania results submitted with those of other southern European populations, such as Greeks or Italians. On AncestryDNA, Albanians typically show between 70% and 90% of Italy / Greece, with the rest being labeled Eastern European.

Have any Albanians on Quora performed a DNA ancestry test? If so, what were your results?


I'm not going to ask whether or not this answered your question because I know it did;)

Other readings:

Albania | Geographic history

What are the origins of Albanians today?

http://www.elsie.de/pdf/articles/A2015EarlyHistoryAlbania.pdf

Kosovo, Origins: Serbs, Albanians and Vlachs (excerpt from chapter 2 of Malcolm's acclaimed book)

Texts and documents of the history of Albania

It is a bit difficult to answer this question directly. After all, what you are is the result of your genes combined with what happened to you since you were a little zygote. In the case of infectious diseases or physical disorders, it is a 50-50 truce. For example, your immunity, the strength of your bones has everything to do with your genetic makeup, but it is your diet, your hygiene and the physical strength and immunity that you develop later with your own efforts and the medication / diet is what counts. . the majority. In the case of metabolic diseases, your genetic makeup plays a more important role. In genetic diseases

Keep reading

It is a bit difficult to answer this question directly. After all, what you are is the result of your genes combined with what happened to you since you were a little zygote. In the case of infectious diseases or physical disorders, it is a 50-50 truce. For example, your immunity, the strength of your bones has everything to do with your genetic makeup, but it is your diet, your hygiene and the physical strength and immunity that you develop later with your own efforts and the medication / diet is what counts. . the majority. In the case of metabolic diseases, your genetic makeup plays a more important role. In genetic diseases, genes are solely responsible. So, depending on the type of disease it is, the weight given to the fact that "genes are responsible" varies.
But you will find that somewhere or everywhere, from time to time, genes have some responsibility for how an individual reacts to disease. The exceptions are accidents that cause physical injury. But even how you recover from serious physical injury will depend on the model your body was built on, and those are your genes. So genes strongly influence health.

Here are some resources that can help:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK19932/
http://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/mar/19/do-your-genes- determine-your-whole-life

Big question! It is because genes can mutate and change based on what we put into our body. Food, medicine, and beverages play a huge role in what we activate in our bodies. For example, a family may have a long list of breast cancer, but only a few can get the disease. However, another family that does not have breast cancer in the family history, a person may have it suddenly. At the end of the day we are what we eat, our skin and cells recover every few months. So we literally become what we consume, so if someone eats junk food / processed food often without substance, the

Keep reading

Big question! It is because genes can mutate and change based on what we put into our body. Food, medicine, and beverages play a huge role in what we activate in our bodies. For example, a family may have a long list of breast cancer, but only a few can get the disease. However, another family that does not have breast cancer in the family history, a person may have it suddenly. At the end of the day we are what we eat, our skin and cells recover every few months. So we literally become what we consume, so if someone eats junk food / processed food often without substance, then they are weakening their immune system and allowing their body to activate genetic diseases, including other pathogens,

The environment determines the extent to which genetic potential can be achieved. If you have significant lead exposure, poor nutrition, a lacking enrichment environment, use drugs and alcohol, and are a victim of abuse, you will likely only achieve a modest percentage of your genetic potential.

Genetics determines potential, if you are born with genes that result in abnormal brain development then you may have extremely limited potential, whereas if you are born with genes that predispose you to a "genius" level IQ, you have potential significant.

If the environment is suitable (for example, the typical US medium).

Keep reading

The environment determines the extent to which genetic potential can be achieved. If you have significant lead exposure, poor nutrition, a lacking enrichment environment, use drugs and alcohol, and are a victim of abuse, you will likely only achieve a modest percentage of your genetic potential.

Genetics determines potential, if you are born with genes that result in abnormal brain development then you may have extremely limited potential, whereas if you are born with genes that predispose you to a "genius" level IQ, you have potential significant.

If the environment is suitable (say, the typical US middle class), then there is not much more benefit from the additional contribution of resources (say a typical upper class family). However, poverty and mistreatment of fetal development can play a huge role in determining whether you achieve your potential.

Therefore, the role that each one plays depends on the specific genes and the environment.

Hair health is due to hygiene, hair growth is due to genetics. You can have healthy or unhealthy hair depending on how often you take care of it and the products you use on it. But no product on the face of this Earth will stop hair growth where you don't want it, or increase hair growth where you do want it.

Genetics determines practically everything that has to do with health from the predisposition or the presence of various conditions that cause abnormalities, reactions and diseases, metabolism, organic and hormonal functions.

Other Guides:


GET SPECIAL OFFER FROM OUR PARTNER.