The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
well no if you go to a place where people routinely don't get enough nutrition and are routinely fighting off infectious diseases like this has been studied in rural Bolivia for example or rural India now height is no longer 85% heritable it's only 50% heritable why because people in these situations where they don't get enough nourishment
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
one of the most heritable traits that we know about in humans is height and in the United States height is about 85% heritable 85% of the variation in the trade of height can be explained uh by what you inherit from your mother and your father well what's the rest well it's nutrition it's the diseases you fought off it's also random variation which we'll talk about a lot later