Slashdot Mirror


DNA Test To Determine Kids' Sports Futures

bs0d3 writes "Parents are being sold on the idea of buying DNA tests for their kids, to find out which sports they will be better at. The company called Atlas is based in Boulder, Colorado; and is selling DNA tests for $160. They are looking for what's called the ACTN-three gene, the gene behind what is called 'fast-twitch explosive muscles.' Children that don't have ACTN-three will be better suited for endurance sports like long distance running or swimming. Children that have a lot of it will be better suited for sports like football, rugby, wrestling, or hockey. Kids that have some ACTN-three will not be the fastest and not the slowest, they don't burn out the quickest and they don't last the longest. They are categorized as capable of playing just about any type of sport they like."

240 comments

  1. How about by bobstreo · · Score: 2, Funny

    How will their performance be in Madden Games?

    1. Re:How about by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Send me $100 & a blood sample and I'll analyze your DNA and tell you if you have the gullibility gene.

    2. Re:How about by VillageDolt · · Score: 2

      Dude, 4chan is thataway.

      --
      justa lurker
    3. Re:How about by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      How about chessboxing?

    4. Re:How about by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You did post an address to mail to.... D'oh!

      - H. Simpson.

  2. I think this is great. by PCM2 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Great idea. I'm glad this service exists. You know what it's going to be really good for?

    Lying. Saving your money but telling your kid you ran the test anyway, and what it said.

    --
    Breakfast served all day!
    1. Re:I think this is great. by Fluffeh · · Score: 2

      Lying. Saving your money but telling your kid you ran the test anyway, and what it said.

      Given that it is only $160, I think it will more likely be used to put a "scientific" backing to parents berating/nagging their kids for not working hard enough... "Jimmy, you have all this potential, the scientific test we ran on you proves it, you need to run faster to get gold medals! Stop slacking off and train harder already - make us proud!"

      --
      Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
    2. Re:I think this is great. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think I'd feel awful telling a kid, "No, you shouldn't play hockey because you have genetic indicators that say you probably don't have the very best type of muscle development for the game."

      All kinds of kids become really, really good at various sports because... surprise of surprises... the work really hard at it.

    3. Re:I think this is great. by cptdondo · · Score: 5, Interesting

      No shit. My kid (who's a better than average swimmer) won't go to the State competition anymore as he's seen too many parents yelling at their kids. "How come you didn't win? You really screwed up!" - to a 7 year old.

      I'm backing him 100% on that. Yup, he's qualified, he's fast, and he's good but it's just no fun to watch parents be assholes.

      So where's the "I really want to do it" gene? My daughter is not as good a swimmer but she's highly coveted by her team because she really wants to be there. She'll never get above middle of the pack, but every coach wants her on their team - because she works harder than anyone else and loves it, and encourages everyone around her.

      Where's the gene for that?

      This will be used by parents to beat up on their kids; parents who never were more than middle of the pack anything, now are 100 lbs overwieght, but know their kid is the next Michael Phelps. Blech.

    4. Re:I think this is great. by Isaac+Remuant · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Thanks for the sanity.

      Extreme competition ruins a lot of sports and athletes. The experience and the joy of training/playing is lost and replaced by this constant stress to fare better than others. This doesn't happen to everyone, of course, but I know a lot of people who have been "shamed" (many times by themselves) into stopping all activity because they're not good enough. And lack of practice only makes it worse for a potential comeback.

      It even happens with simple things like jogging.

      That said. I don't think such a test is inherently bad. If you know that your son has good chances at being better at something, you might think it's a good idea to let him try out those sports to see if he enjoys them and can exploit that "advantage". Just as long as you don't become a maniac who will psychologically pressure the kid into madness nor bet highly on his earnings as sport-star (the potential gold mine kid doesn't usually end well).

      --
      "Science can amuse and fascinate us all, but it is engineering that changes the world. " - Asimov.
    5. Re:I think this is great. by SniperJoe · · Score: 2

      I think that's the nurture part of the "nature vs. nurture" debate, which illustrates the main flaw with the DNA test indicating sports aptitude:

      No matter how good your genes are, you need to have the will and mental fortitude to work hard and shape your raw talent.

      The best genes in the world cannot cure apathy. On a personal note, kudos to both your children. As a former competitive swimmer, I have seen exactly what your son has spoken about and it saddens me. I have also tried to be a hard worker and encourage others (as your daughter does). Athletes tend to be competitive people and by design, we don't like seeing people working harder than us, so its easy for such a personality to drive the team as whole to higher levels of performance.

    6. Re:I think this is great. by cptdondo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      As a former competitive swimmer, I have seen exactly what your son has spoken about and it saddens me. I have also tried to be a hard worker and encourage others (as your daughter does). Athletes tend to be competitive people and by design, we don't like seeing people working harder than us, so its easy for such a personality to drive the team as whole to higher levels of performance.

      I have to give a lot of credit to the head coach; he's been at it for 33 years and his goal is to create lifetime athletes. He doesn't care if you do well today; he wants your best every day, and he's willing to work at it. Our team has not won a relay ever (I think) since he puts one new/weak swimmer in every time. One time my son - then 9 - swam with the 15 year olds. They got their butt kicked but they all had a grand time; the high schoolers because they had no pressure to win, and my 9 year old because they all welcomed him and treated him as an equal.

      Part of it is also that we're all athletes to some extent; my wife is a distance runner and I'm an endurance cyclist so we know how hard it is to push every day. We know that our kids need encouragement and time off. Sometimes you have a great day, and sometimes you have a crappy day.

    7. Re:I think this is great. by muindaur · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I was glad my parents let me play the sports I wanted to for the most part. Little league baseball was fun, but I wish I could have played ice hockey (there just wasn't a rink nearby and within their budget.) I never wanted to play football as a kid, and liked basketball as a winter sport. Though my parents were probably happy with those two because they are dirt cheap for working class parents. Just pay the fee for little league (covers the numbered shirt), and a glove lasts a few years. It was the same for basketball. The only real costs was the new cleats and basketball shoes each year.

      Poor kids these days get their parents sports failures pushed on them. Sometimes my team won, mostly we lost, but we still had fun (still sore about the head of the league adding three innings five minutes before the cut off time after the standard six innings so his team could come back for a win.) In high school I switched to track to go from 80s to 90s in PE, and participate in a sport with practice that was more laid back for the throwers. Maybe I was terrible, but hanging out with people I liked more often was nice. Meets meant a great deal of sitting on your ass in the grass waiting for your event, and then warming up shortly before.

    8. Re:I think this is great. by Artifex · · Score: 1

      No shit. My kid (who's a better than average swimmer) won't go to the State competition anymore as he's seen too many parents yelling at their kids. "How come you didn't win? You really screwed up!" - to a 7 year old.

      I'm backing him 100% on that. Yup, he's qualified, he's fast, and he's good but it's just no fun to watch parents be assholes.

      So where's the "I really want to do it" gene? My daughter is not as good a swimmer but she's highly coveted by her team because she really wants to be there. She'll never get above middle of the pack, but every coach wants her on their team - because she works harder than anyone else and loves it, and encourages everyone around her.

      Where's the gene for that?

      There is no gene for the human spirit. -- Gattaca.

      --
      Get off my launchpad!
    9. Re:I think this is great. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some youth sports programs have gone to hell in a handbasket, that's for sure. I last played school sports 7 years ago in middle school. It was quite fun for me because I was able to play and participate despite being only mediocre. Although the hyperactive parent promoters were there, they did not rule the program. Now my little brother is opting not to participate in the same program because the program has morphed into on that seeks to only promote its stars and use everyone else as a benchwarmer. Fortunately for him he has found a new program (and a new sport) where he can still play, but given the trends I wonder if there will be anything like that left in another 7 years.

    10. Re:I think this is great. by NFN_NLN · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Thanks for the sanity.

      Extreme competition ruins a lot of sports and athletes. The experience and the joy of training/playing is lost and replaced by this constant stress to fare better than others.

      It isn't just psychological, there can be long-term physical damage. Gymnasts often experience wrist and ankle issues from over training.

      “Little Girls in Pretty Boxes: The Making and Breaking of Elite Gymnasts and Figure Skaters"

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Girls_in_Pretty_Boxes

    11. Re:I think this is great. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Great quote from an excellent movie. My thoughts exactly with your reply

    12. Re:I think this is great. by stephathome · · Score: 2

      Thank you. My son plays soccer in an under 8 age range, and his last game was against a team with a really serious coach. She was screaming so much at the kids on her team, that parents on ours started cheering for the kids to just have fun. She was really ridiculous, especially when our team managed to tie the game for a time. Tough game, other team won, but I think our team enjoyed themselves more and I'll take that, especially at so young an age.

      Give the kids tips on doing better, sure. But there's no need to expect them to win every game or to be the best. Not like it's likely to be a career for most kids anyhow, and even then there's no need to get so serious this young. Let them love their sport. Win or lose, having fun is what keeps them going.

    13. Re:I think this is great. by evil_aaronm · · Score: 1

      Seen wrestling parents, lately? You want the definition of "asshole," look no further. It's messed up when a parent or coach is yelling in disgust at a noob four or five years old because they're on their back in their first or second match. And, of course, these parents / coaches are likely to be the fat, beer-drinking rednecks who would probably have a massive coronary 30 seconds into a match of their own, if they had the stones to strap on a pair of wrestling shoes and toe the line.

      My son wrestled and did well: a two-time state rep from NY - before they did the two division crap. However, he never did anything that I wouldn't do, including starving himself to make weight during the weekend tournaments, doing extra work after practice, etc. If he was suffering, so was I. I scheduled my work day so I could be at practice almost every day, and often drilled with him in his group. He graduated a few years ago and we're as tight as could be: There's a deep mutual respect because we know the hardships each of us has gone through.

      Way too many parents, today, are looking for a meal ticket on the backs of their kids, and their only "skin in the game" is driving the kid to practice or a meet. Fuckers.

    14. Re:I think this is great. by quadrox · · Score: 2

      It might be a (rhetorically speaking) good quote from a great movie - but that doesn't make it true.

      Please note that I'm not willing to state the exact opposite either. However, to my knowledge we have no reason to believe that "spirit" is not something determined by genetics, just as we don't have evidence that it is determined by genetics.

    15. Re:I think this is great. by quadrox · · Score: 2

      On further thought the quote is actually is a contradiction in terms. The human spirit is by very definition something about humans (as opposed to monkeys, aliens, plants...). What makes humans into humans? Their genes of course. You might argue that the human spirit is a cultural thing, but then I would say that culture also is shaped by genetics. I'm not saying that culture is 100% predetermined by genetics, but I'm saying that without human genes being what they are, human culture most likely would be different from what they are.

    16. Re:I think this is great. by kermidge · · Score: 1

      Selah. Had I mod points you'd get some. When I see anyone, but a parent especially, acting like an asshole I have to wonder both if their own upbringing was so twisted their psyches were ruined and if they're incapable of introspection.

    17. Re:I think this is great. by PCM2 · · Score: 1

      That's kind of my point. You don't really send in the test. You wait a couple weeks and then you say whatever your kid should hear. Save it for when the kid's feeling discouraged.

      We know genetic tests for sports achievement are bullshit anyway. If we relied strictly on genetic factors (and the received wisdom about them), there would be no white men playing basketball.

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    18. Re:I think this is great. by Teeroy32 · · Score: 2

      Yeah I had a coach like that, but It was when I was 26, I was playing second grade Aussie rules for my country town, now 2/3 of the team game from the team across the road who had just folded and had been "wooden spooners" for like a decade, we had the spirit that we were having a social kick with our mates, sure we tried our hardest but we weren't serious, just for fun. Well to cut a long story short the new team I was playing for had inherited the wooden spooner position, we lost our game by 2 goals(12 points) to the team that was top of the ladder(and ended up winning the flag), in the change room the coach started saying we had played our best, the went on into a screaming tirade about our best wasn't good enough and winning is all that matters, I just stood up and walked to the showers and ignored him. He started having a go at me saying I'm not finished yet, my reaction was "Well I'm finished I only play to have fun with my mates, and secondly we aren't playing first grade and we aren't playing for sheep stations". He started saying shit like I was week and then a heap of other boys stood up and went to the showers and ignored him to. Pretty much from that point on no one had respect for him and some of us didn't show up for the rest of the season(and yhe ones who did ignored the dick of a coach and just looked after their teammates). Needless to say the club didn't renew his position the following season, our new coach was like us, seconds is for fun, and we made the finals that year, I understand the attitude of winning at all cost if its first grade or professional(some of our first grade players were payed) but when its just social or juniors the participation and friendship is whats important, winning is just a very welcome bonus. With my daughter starting nippers next year(under 7's) all I care is she has fun and tries her hardest, and god help any parent who has a go at her for sucking like I did

      --
      I don't have an attitude problem, Its you that has a problem with my attitude
    19. Re:I think this is great. by Teeroy32 · · Score: 1

      I'd mod this up if I coud, its exactly how me and my missus feels

      --
      I don't have an attitude problem, Its you that has a problem with my attitude
    20. Re:I think this is great. by BlackSabbath · · Score: 2

      > Where's the gene for that?

      Good question. I don't actually know, but I CAN tell you that there IS a test for the Arsehole-parent gene. It's not 100% accurate, but if a parent sends their kid's DNA sample to the lab mentioned in the article...chances are they've got it!

    21. Re:I think this is great. by Tim+C · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If you know that your son has good chances at being better at something, you might think it's a good idea to let him try out those sports to see if he enjoys them and can exploit that "advantage".

      Fair enough, though personally I let my daughter try whatever she wants (within reason for her age, etc, of course) regardless of whether or not I think she might be good at it.

    22. Re:I think this is great. by rrossman2 · · Score: 1

      The sad thing is in the local paper for the smaller town I live in now, there's a call in " opinion line" they print every Saturday. Every week during a high school sports season, and mostly during football, there are people calling in bitching about this that or the other thing.. "we need a new coach, how can our team be 4-4??" Or one bitching about the little league team down here and how all the local towns should form one big league so they'd have a large talent pool to pick from so they could get to the little league world series like the other PA team did this year...

      Its crazy. First off, most of the people calling in bitching are from middle of no where poor areas who wouldn't be able to cover the travel expenses as a little league team plays division, region, etc play-offs to even get to the llws.. and as for football, the coach can make a hunch of ok players beat a team of super stars.. yes some coaches are better than others, but the same applies to players. These parents really annoy the shit out of me

    23. Re:I think this is great. by xaxa · · Score: 1

      No shit. My kid (who's a better than average swimmer) won't go to the State competition anymore as he's seen too many parents yelling at their kids. "How come you didn't win? You really screwed up!" - to a 7 year old.

      The FA (Football Association) in the UK has a campaign targeted at parents to try and prevent that. Take a look, it's here. Maybe write to the swimming association (whoever accredits the competition) and see if they recognise the problem.

      My dad's a coach, with ages ~11 to 20, and he has problems with pushy parents. Often it shows when he doesn't pick someone for a team -- in which case the child generally knows someone else is better, but the parent disagrees ("well, I'll take her to basketball instead, they'll put her on the team!" "Mum, I don't like basketball. I'll be good enough for the next race, it's because you wouldn't let me train over Christmas, I'm a bit unfit" ah...)

    24. Re:I think this is great. by RichMeatyTaste · · Score: 1

      I apply this same thinking to people who I (help) interview for the various teams I have worked on. Give me people who are willing to learn (and have shown that ability) and a good fit for the team; choosing based on skills alone is waaaaay too risky.

      --


      Ever feel like you are driving the getaway car?
    25. Re:I think this is great. by JSC · · Score: 1

      TRUTH!!!! My youngest son just completed his Senior season of soccer. By the fast-twitch muscle theory, he shouldn't be a good soccer player but he is. On the soccer field, just about every other player is quicker off the line than him but any distance over about 10 yards, my son can run down any player on the field (his other sport is track where he's a distance runner). He has the stamina to stay in the entire game - and as a defensive mid, that's pretty good since his 'position' is the middle half of the field. Add in a knack for being able to stick like Velcro to whatever opposing player he's covering even if that player is behind him and you start to understand why his team voted him Best Defensive Player. But he shouldn't be as good as he is. He is that good because he loves the game and he really applies himself to it - something that test won't test for.

      --
      Time's fun when you're having flies. - Kermit the Frog
    26. Re:I think this is great. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's not just sports. Sales, middle-management, and I'm sure a host of other jobs increasingly make impossible demands of people. No matter what you do, it isn't good enough. If you put in 90 hours a week, they ask why you didn't put in 120. It burns people to a crisp.

    27. Re:I think this is great. by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      But then there's the other side of the fence where they take it too far. For instance, there's we don't keep score anymore because we don't want kids to feel bad. Or the greatest I've ever heard. We keep score, but if you get ahead more than 5 goals, you lose. That's right, Don't do too well, or you will be declared the loser. The extremists on both sides are taking all the fun out of it.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    28. Re:I think this is great. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mod parent up.

      As a highly certified swim coach, I completely agree with the assessments. Sports are driven and ruined by the overly aggressive push-em-till-they-quit wanna be parents. Like cptdondo, I want kids on my team who want to be there, have enthusiasm, and work hard. Success is a byproduct of that, not the other way around.

      The overbearing parents are ruining the experience for everyone, especially their own kids. There is a fine line between support and command/control. It's easy to see when someone is over the line. And like cptdondo's kid, they all see it.

    29. Re:I think this is great. by cptdondo · · Score: 1

      Yeah, well....

      Our water polo team had a match against a much smaller club. They could only field 7 players (that's what you need for a team) but one could not play because of injury. She "started" - got in the water and got out as soon as the whistle blew so the team could play.

      Our coaches called a time out, and pulled one of our players to make the game even. At one point we were losing and our coaches stuck with it; they played fair. That taught all the kids a very valuable lesson; you win fairly. You play fair and on an even field. You don't take advantage of the other team.

      There is a rule that if you are ahead by more than 20 points, it's "unsportsmanlike conduct" and you can get sanctioned. I agree with it - as there's no way to ensure an even field. When you have one high school that plays water polo year round, and does not have a swim team, and can field 3 times as many players as you, and another can barely field 7 players and plays 9 weeks out of the year, it's unsportmanlike to run up the score. Otherwise it becomes a $ game; the big and rich schools win and the poor schools lose.

      The point of games is to learn; not to crush your enemy and hear the lamentations of their women. That's for Gengis Khan; not middle and high school.

    30. Re:I think this is great. by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      20 points sounds more reasonable however I'm unfamiliar with the scoring of water polo, 20 points in American football is nothing. This was soccer, and 5 seems like a pretty small margin. Teams have come back from worse many times. I still really don't get the point. Being behind by 5 points and having the other team play keep-away because they aren't allowed to score is no more fun than being behind by a larger amount. Also When I was a kid, we'd just end the game if the score got too out of control. And the winning team would win automatically. No point in running up the score I agree, but there should be no reason to lose a game because you scored too many goals.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    31. Re:I think this is great. by cptdondo · · Score: 1

      I agree that losing the game is pretty silly. Water polo is much like soccer; one goal is one point, but it's a higher scoring game than soccer. The sanction is against the coach and not the team. The coach is supposed to put in his/her second (third?) string or practice stuff his team doesn't know if the score gets lopsided.

    32. Re:I think this is great. by Reziac · · Score: 1

      By coincidence, yesterday I read (well, skimmed) this paper, which is basically the same principle except the focus was on intelligence:

      http://tinyurl.com/7azcpea

      Genes make us what we are; what we *do* with that genetic potential is what makes "spirit".

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    33. Re:I think this is great. by Jon_S · · Score: 1

      No shit. My kid (who's a better than average swimmer) won't go to the State competition anymore as he's seen too many parents yelling at their kids. "How come you didn't win? You really screwed up!" - to a 7 year old.

      The FA (Football Association) in the UK has a campaign targeted at parents to try and prevent that. Take a look, it's here. Maybe write to the swimming association (whoever accredits the competition) and see if they recognise the problem.

      They do. Although the reference to "State Competition" tells me he might be referring to High School Competition rather than club swimming.

    34. Re:I think this is great. by quadrox · · Score: 1

      I don't want to start an overly long discussion that leads nowhere, but I don't see anything of what you said as being contradictory to what I stated in my two posts (espcecially the second post).

      What we do may be the spirit, but the stuff that makes us do what we do (i.e. culture) is, or at least could be, also based on genetics. My point is that, no matter how indirect, in the end it all comes from the genes and external influences. It's true that the external influences cannot be disregarded, but neither can genetics. Without our genes being as they are, the "human spirit" might be completely different.

      In science, there is no room for a magic essence such as a "soul" or "pure spirit". It's all based on causality. External factors and our genes determine the outcome, not some abstract concept called "spirit".

    35. Re:I think this is great. by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      All that is true, but it's quite possible that there are so many genes, with so many possible interactions that it's practically impossible to do a test for the complete personality[1].

      And that's before you even start on environmental influences.

      [1] "soul" sort of sounds mystic. I realize psychology isn't an exact science, but at least it doesn't go in for ghosts...

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    36. Re:I think this is great. by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Oh, I wasn't disagreeing; just happened to have that paper to hand and threw it in as evidence. :)

      I think there's something to cultural genetics too -- selection pressure toward genetic tendencies that support or at least integrate with that culture (which in turn arose from a certain range of genotypes which were successful in that particular environment). There've been studies that support this for what jobs one is good at or desires to do; culture is just that concept expanded.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    37. Re:I think this is great. by wanzeo · · Score: 1

      If you haven't ever watched gattaca, I highly recommend it. It deals with this exact same topic.

      The more serious question is not predicting sports futures, but whether or not to allow parents to customize their children by selection.

      "Well, doctor, we'd like the one that is as trustworthy, smart, obedient, attractive, sociable and athletic as our genes can possibly allow."

    38. Re:I think this is great. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah... Bravo! Where is the "Got Heart" gene. I don't think there has ever been a way to gage "HEART". I have coached little league and I'd rather have a kid with desire, coachability and "heart" than a lazy know it all kid with all the talent in the world that ends up average.

  3. If there's a will... by phobafiliac · · Score: 0

    Can they test for will & determination?

    --
    take what i say with a grain of salt, a dash of pepper, a pinch of oregano, and an itty bitty little drip of faygo
    1. Re:If there's a will... by Joce640k · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I notice there's no "geeky and no good at any sports" option on their list.

      This will be used by parents who are going to bully their kids into playing sports whether they want to or not. Society will be poorer as a result.

      --
      No sig today...
  4. In Vitro by TheMiddleRoad · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That'll be when the fun begins. Until then, it's just a mindfuck.

  5. This is too easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What a waste of money.

    If your son is born without a penis, he can play badminton. If your daughter looks like a guy, she'll do well in the broad jump.

    nexr,

    1. Re:This is too easy by Joce640k · · Score: 1

      What the hell is the broad jump?

      --
      No sig today...
    2. Re:This is too easy by Plunky · · Score: 1

      What the hell is the broad jump?

      Standing Long Jump

    3. Re:This is too easy by Joce640k · · Score: 1

      Oh, OK. The way that was written I thought it meant something like the long jump... but for broads.

      --
      No sig today...
  6. Cue the whining about modern society... by Elbereth · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I predict a strong showing of reactionary "what's wrong with people today?" comments. I have to wonder if getting an ultrasound was originally greeted with as much crankiness as I often see from articles like this.

    Myself, I'm a relentless progressive. So much so, I thought Gattaca looked kind of nifty.

    Of course, sometimes I say that just see the horrified expressions on people's faces.

    1. Re:Cue the whining about modern society... by Concerned+Onlooker · · Score: 1

      "Of course, sometimes I say that just see the horrified expressions on people's faces."

      8-0

      --
      http://www.rootstrikers.org/
    2. Re:Cue the whining about modern society... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Informative

      The real whining that this test deserves is that it is (like a fair few of the hokier genetic tests) overwhelmingly likely to be as or less predictive than a simple family history.

      Because modest amounts of sequencing have gotten so cheap, tests of this flavor don't tend to be outright lies(they do, indeed, usually test precisely what they claim to test); but the sales pitch inevitably glosses over the fact that only a few phenotypic characteristics are actually wholly determined by the single gene they can economically sample for.

      There are a few conditions that are sufficiently well understood, and causally simple, that you can actually get a "Yes/No" out of a genetic test; but they are rare, and this is unlikely to be one of them.

      I'd certainly be delighted to see genetic defects avoided, and useful genetic traits made more commonly available, but I'm not impressed by the chances of opportunistic lab-coated fortune tellers being the ones who get us there...

    3. Re:Cue the whining about modern society... by DigiShaman · · Score: 1, Troll

      If you're in favor of a Gattaca future, you're a straight up fascist. Just thought I point that out FYI.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    4. Re:Cue the whining about modern society... by chrb · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Gattaca was nifty. When given a choice between a long, healthy life, or a shorter one subject to disease and illness, people ought to be horrified that anyone would choose the latter for their children. Who wouldn't want a society where illness and disease had been pretty much eliminated, and where every child that was born could expect a long and healthy life? The only problem was the in-valids, those who hadn't been genetically engineered. But in the real world we could expect those people to be a very small proportion of the population - when genetic engineering gives certain children such a big advantage as portrayed in the film, the first political party to propose that it be provided as a government-funded service will be elected, and it will be declared a "right" available to all couples.

    5. Re:Cue the whining about modern society... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Interesting

      That was the bit that really disappointed me about GATTACA: Instead of focusing on the genuinely interesting question of 'What happens when we can't even pretend that all men are created equal, and we can control a whole lot of you that used to be a roll of the dice?', it basically just did a slightly-futuristic totalitarian apartheid morality tale, where nobody actually gives a damn about the fact that genetic engineering actually makes you better, because they are too busy shoving around the non-genetically-engineered...

      Earth to repressive future: If genetic engineering actually makes people superior, you wouldn't need a massive surveillance state dedicated entirely to keeping the inferiors in line, you'd just need a lightweight meritocracy...

    6. Re:Cue the whining about modern society... by polymeris · · Score: 5, Insightful

      when education gives certain children such a big advantage as portrayed in the film, the first political party to propose that it be provided as a government-funded service will be elected, and it will be declared a "right"

      when health care gives certain children such a big advantage as portrayed in the film, the first political party to propose that it be provided as a government-funded service will be elected, and it will be declared a "right"

      Sadly, I don't think it works quite like that. Not everywhere, at least.

    7. Re:Cue the whining about modern society... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm largely in agreement with your point, I just thought that Gattaca was a pretty terrible demonstration of its own premise...

      I've never understood the ethical calculus where people who, say, negligently expose children to conditions that create a risk of morbidity or mortality(unfenced swimming pools, prenatal drugs, neglect, etc, etc.) are looked down on as scum; but people who negligently expose children to (known) risks of heritable disease are generally not condemned, sometimes even looked on as courageous or such.

      Were genetic engineering (of sufficient maturity) available, it seems like the incentive to provide it broadly or universally would not only be populist appeal; but pragmatics: illness, weakness, stupidity, etc. are all expensive, and they usually bleed over on to those who live nearby(not to mention the emotional costs). Being able to reliably turn out people with the best body and mind genetic factors can offer would likely be an excellent investment.

      Gattaca, unfortunately, gave it all up to tell a little story about a society that dumped (as best the viewer could tell) an enormous level of resources into actively repressing the non-engineered, without any particular effort to judge them on their merits. It ended up basically being a story about Jim Crow laws or caste systems with a spacesuit on...

    8. Re:Cue the whining about modern society... by DigiShaman · · Score: 2, Interesting

      ...or a culling of the herd. Once you've established upon a factual sense of superiority through genetic engineering, social dynamics radically shift. If you thought racism was bad pre and post civil war, you've haven't seen nothing yet. It may take several hundred years, but I can see future where the face of humanity forks in divergence in ways never thought possible. Think about it, engineered labor slaves, sex slaves, super nerds, super soldiers, super hybrids...ect. And no matter how much we play with nature, it always seems to bitch-slap us back to a since of humility. Only this time the damage has already been done.

      No, I'm not looking forward to this technology. Not because it has the potential to save lives in specialized cases, but because of the wonton abuse of it. I voice an opinion that we shove this fucking genie back into it's bottle and hurl it into the core of our Sun.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    9. Re:Cue the whining about modern society... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I voice an opinion that we shove this fucking genie back into it's bottle and hurl it into the core of our Sun.

      great idea! for that, we'll need a super astronaut

    10. Re:Cue the whining about modern society... by russotto · · Score: 1

      Think about it, engineered labor slaves, sex slaves, super nerds, super soldiers, super hybrids...ect.

      As dystopias go, it seems better than where we're headed now. Brave New World over 1984.

    11. Re:Cue the whining about modern society... by KingAlanI · · Score: 1

      yeah, support genetic engineering, and people think you're friggin' Hitler. (but in all seriousness, I'm tempted to think that racists/anti-Semites/etc make the concept look worse than it actually is.)

      --
      I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
    12. Re:Cue the whining about modern society... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What did you expect? The story was written by one of those poor unfortunate inferior non-genetically engineered authors...

    13. Re:Cue the whining about modern society... by MaskedSlacker · · Score: 1

      Did you actually read Brave New World? It was just as much reliant on fascist enforcement of thought crime laws as 1984. It was somewhat less sinister (Mustafa Mond seemed like a downright nice guy, all things considered), but the means involved were not terribly different.

    14. Re:Cue the whining about modern society... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I believe that's the exact point that the GP was making...

      Would you like your dystopian shit sandwich on rye or whole wheat?

    15. Re:Cue the whining about modern society... by aurelian · · Score: 1

      In other words, this test is pretty bogus. I agree.

    16. Re:Cue the whining about modern society... by lightknight · · Score: 2

      Yes, but that was the point behind the entire movie! If and when society does / has devised a metric for who is and is not a valid, wars inevitably erupt. And the valid, as judged by society, end up getting the boots put to them by those who were deemed invalid.

      Someone might call Godwin's law on this one, but let us consider the Third Reich. The German scientists went so far as to attempt to remove any "Jewish" influences in the branches of science, that while they achieved a lot early on, they ended up handing their enemies at least one Jewish scientist of note: Albert Einstein. And what a handful of scientists were cooking up on this side of the pond for the German threat (nukes), makes those V2s look like fire-crackers in comparison.

      And yes, that is probably what would happen with genetic engineered children vs. non-genetic engineered children. And the big question is, the one no one wants to think about, is that while you can select for and pop out genetically engineered children like those no tomorrow, with all this engineering, how would you know that you didn't miss the cutoff for a major evolution of the human race? Do you want to be the genetic engineer who finds out that for the past two thousand years, mankind has been holding itself back, because its idea of perfect or better, was not?

      The nasty bit about genetic illnesses is that some of that stuff is actually laying the groundwork for new and more interesting evolutionary paths for the human race. Not all, but possibly more than a few. Consider sickle-cell anemia or tay-sachs disease. They confer advantages on some, death / horrible lives on others.

      --
      I am John Hurt.
    17. Re:Cue the whining about modern society... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ultrasound doesn't make you cranky? It can be abused for selecting the sex of the unborn by aborting all of the wrong one till you get it right.

      Used responsibly, it can be useful, of course, but where to draw the line?

    18. Re:Cue the whining about modern society... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      because of the wonton abuse

      The horror!

    19. Re:Cue the whining about modern society... by SpeZek · · Score: 1

      Doesn't superiority imply superior morals as well? If one thing has remained constant throughout human technical evolution, it's that, however long it may take, we do get better as we evolve.

    20. Re:Cue the whining about modern society... by Kris+Thalamus · · Score: 1

      So what you're saying is that it's better to play genetic roulette than it is to intervene or direct? Do we dare to disturb the universe in its natural state? That argument could be used against any endeavour. If humanity's hubris is so risky and/or counterproductive, then shouldn't we abandon the discipline of engineering and medicine as well? (Cf. Caveman Science Fiction)

    21. Re:Cue the whining about modern society... by jpapon · · Score: 2

      There's nothing fundamentally amoral about eugenics. The problem was the assholes applying the theory.

      --
      -- Let us endeavor so to live that when we pass even the undertaker shall be sorry. -- M. Twain
    22. Re:Cue the whining about modern society... by syousef · · Score: 1

      I predict a strong showing of reactionary "what's wrong with people today?" comments. I have to wonder if getting an ultrasound was originally greeted with as much crankiness as I often see from articles like this.

      Myself, I'm a relentless progressive. So much so, I thought Gattaca looked kind of nifty.

      Of course, sometimes I say that just see the horrified expressions on people's faces.

      Yep. You have the asshole Gene. That'll be $324.99 thanks.

      Only trouble is you gave away that you're doing it for a reaction aka trolling. Do you tell people how nifty Hitler was and that you thought gas chambers were "nifty"? Godwin be damned.

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    23. Re:Cue the whining about modern society... by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      superior morals

      What is a superior moral and who decides what is and is not superior?

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    24. Re:Cue the whining about modern society... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cars don't make you cranky? The can be abused for selecting a good target for robbing by ignoring all of the less affluent targets till you get it right.

      Used responsibly, the can be useful, of course, but where to draw the line?

    25. Re:Cue the whining about modern society... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's survival of the fittest, not survival of the bestest. And fittest isn't meant in a narrow Jane Fondian way, either.

      Maybe all that is left will be cockroaches in some gloomy future. That doesn't mean a cockroach is "better" now. It's just better at surviving nuclear holocaust.

    26. Re:Cue the whining about modern society... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Brave New World wasn't nearly as heavy-handed in its enforcement as 1984. It didn't need to be: most of its citizens were unintelligent non-Alphas.

    27. Re:Cue the whining about modern society... by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 0

      Except that genetic engineering doesn't make you better, genetic engineering just makes you specialized. Part of what makes the human race successful is the fact that it is fairly generalized and can adapt to just about any environment that life can exist in.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    28. Re:Cue the whining about modern society... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hate the break the news for you, but the Jewish scientists you're looking for are Szilard, Teller and Neumann.

    29. Re:Cue the whining about modern society... by oreiasecaman · · Score: 1

      supernerds!! what an awful future it would be...

      --
      This is a UDP joke, I don't care if you get it or not...
    30. Re:Cue the whining about modern society... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1. "Yes, but that was the point behind the entire movie! If and when society does / has devised a metric for who is and is not a valid, wars inevitably erupt. And the valid, as judged by society, end up getting the boots put to them by those who were deemed invalid.' ONLY IN THE MOVIES
      2. "german scientists" were not scientists at all, they had a blood religion. Their beliefs were not supported by any Science at all. In fact, the Jews were greatly superior with regards to intelligence and other factors than any germans. If you look at history, past and present, you will see that Jews received and receive the greatest amount of Nobel Prizes, Field Medals, Chess Master Awards, Best Writer Awards... Way above any other ethnicity.
      3. Once Intelligence is shown through genetics, there is nothing wrong to advance and promote genetic engineering, improving the general population. You can't make an omelet without cracking a few eggs.

    31. Re:Cue the whining about modern society... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You had me at "sex slaves" :p

    32. Re:Cue the whining about modern society... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I voice an opinion to shove you into a bottle, and fucking hurl you into the core of our Sun.

    33. Re:Cue the whining about modern society... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are an idiot. Please pick up a book on genetics before saying anything else. You obviously don't know anything, other than some bs you saw on tv and pop culture on the net.

    34. Re:Cue the whining about modern society... by HeckRuler · · Score: 1

      you wouldn't need a massive surveillance state dedicated entirely to keeping the inferiors in line, you'd just need a lightweight meritocracy...

      Uh... A meritocracy would determine who rules, and how people get rewarded. And it's a good thing. But it doesn't say a thing about how the lower classes act. Meritocracies today work pretty well for calming down that whole "that's not fair" attitude that the masses get because success is more or less tied to how much effort you put in. But in GATTACA, the meritocracy is kinda unfair, since the kids are screwed from birth. (If I get too cynical, it looks like it's not that much different then today's system of who can afford education, and who you know to get you a job).

      The whole "fair" thing in politics keeps people from rabble rousing and whipping out the guillotine. If it's not fair, you're going to face a deviate/rioting/terrorizing lower class and the powers that be are going to respond with authoritarian force and massive surveillance. To keep the lower class in place.

    35. Re:Cue the whining about modern society... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Genetic experimentation via murder of fully-fledged people with bad genes is a lot worse than seeing if you can alter, just a bit, what kind of baby you can make. I still don't like it, but only one of those situations would I condone a war for.

    36. Re:Cue the whining about modern society... by MaskedSlacker · · Score: 1

      Can I get sourdough?

    37. Re:Cue the whining about modern society... by russotto · · Score: 1

      Did you actually read Brave New World? It was just as much reliant on fascist enforcement of thought crime laws as 1984. It was somewhat less sinister (Mustafa Mond seemed like a downright nice guy, all things considered), but the means involved were not terribly different.

      BNW had the eugenics and the drugs and the prenatal manipulation, so in that way it was _more_ sinister; 1984 used conventional fear and punishment to make you into the new socialist man (or at least to act like him), whereas BNW more directly made you that way. But life in the _1984_ world was basically miserable, even for non-dissidents. BNW, on the other hand, was hedonistic.

    38. Re:Cue the whining about modern society... by KingAlanI · · Score: 1

      I did say "racists/anti-Semites/etc make the concept look worse than it actually is."

      --
      I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
    39. Re:Cue the whining about modern society... by KingAlanI · · Score: 1

      *murder or sterilization*
      I suppose it's important to keep them separate, I probably should have been clear about that.

      --
      I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
  7. Even easier by The_mad_linguist · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There's an even easier test. Look at your kid's birthday. Now look at the cutoff date between age brackets for each sport. Now pick the one where your kid will always be the oldest player on the field. More physical development = wins more = gets more practice AND likes the sport more = positive skill-building feedback loop.

    1. Re:Even easier by Zirbert · · Score: 5, Informative

      Exactly. Much of Malcolm Gladwell's book, Outliers, is devoted to explaining this principle. I put an article about it on my blog a while ago, but far more importantly, it's been on Cracked.com.

    2. Re:Even easier by Vegan+Cyclist · · Score: 1

      There's a bit to this, but there are genetic factors that will play an even larger role - if someone doesn't have an exceptional aerobic engine, there is NO amount of time they can put into it (10,000 hrs, etc) that can make up for it (and i say this coming from the world of cycling, where the average male can hit about 3.9w/kg threshold [1hr], and not get much above that, but the pros will be able to get well above that - and it's a genetic thing.)

      It can certainly help to be in the age range, but there are still other factors that legitimize this test to some degree..

    3. Re:Even easier by Rhaban · · Score: 2

      In short: If you want your kids to be good at sports, fuck in april.

    4. Re:Even easier by Gaygirlie · · Score: 1

      There's an even easier test. Look at your kid's birthday. Now look at the cutoff date between age brackets for each sport. Now pick the one where your kid will always be the oldest player on the field. More physical development = wins more = gets more practice AND likes the sport more = positive skill-building feedback loop.

      I know of an EVEN easier test: ask your kid. Yes, look at your child and literally ASK what the child would like to do, not what you'd want the child to do.

      I personally equate the enjoyment and fulfillment of doing something as success, not the position on some ranking system and as such I couldn't give a flying f*ck about how good a ranking my child gets, I just want the child to enjoy doing whatever it is that (s)he wants to do.

  8. Here's mine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Indoor Kid."

    1. Re:Here's mine by mcavic · · Score: 1

      Exactly. Where's the gene that says I might have a decent shot at bowling, but other than that, stick to the computer?

  9. So is everyone good at least one type of sport by drumlight · · Score: 2

    This sounds really stupid and surely you end up best at the sport you enjoy and practice the most. I think this will just show which parent have the pushiness gene.

    1. Re:So is everyone good at least one type of sport by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, of course, genetic potential has nothing to do with it. I'll just keep practicing basketball, I'm sure there are lots of dwarves in the NBA.

  10. Based on *one* gene? by POTSandPANS · · Score: 1

    Seems useless unless you can find one that will predict what sport the kid will enjoy the most. Enjoying a sport will have a much bigger effect than anything else.

  11. I bet by backslashdot · · Score: 1

    I bet there are loads of top athletes without this gene. I wonder if Usain Bolt has this gene.

    Screening for athleticism, and "intelligence" based on today's limited knowledge of genetics and biology of athleticism is dumb, and will probably remain dumb for at least 50 to 100 years.

    1. Re:I bet by RebelWithoutAClue · · Score: 1

      It is very rare that athletes have no copies of the fast twitch gene.

      --
      "However beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at the results" - Winston Churchill
  12. fast twitch muscle? by phantomfive · · Score: 1

    I always thought the crucial gene for high school (and junior high) sports was how soon you grow tall, and how tall (and big) you actually get. Fast twitch or slow twitch is just a minor adjustment compared to those.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    1. Re:fast twitch muscle? by f()rK()_Bomb · · Score: 1

      What about wrestling or rugby, probly applies to American football, lower centre of gravity. I'm naturally really strong and not tall hence was really good at rugby or wrestling type stuff cause you couldn't knock me over.

      --
      "The space elevator will be built about 50 years after everyone stops laughing." - Arthur C. Clarke ~1980
    2. Re:fast twitch muscle? by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Nah, being tall and big is still important in American football. The quarterback needs to be tall because he needs to throw the ball over the heads of people. The receiver needs to be tall so he can catch the ball easily. If you are a lineman, it helps to be tall so you can block the ball as the quarterback tries to throw it over your head, but in that case it's more important to be big. A lot of linemen are over 300 pounds, and at that point, height is not as important as size.
      For the runners, one of the best runningbacks of all time was 5ft6 inches (167cm), but he had massive strength in his legs. Another great running back was 5ft8 (170cm). But that just shows height is not important for that position, because there have also been some incredible runners that were a lot taller.

      But that's at the pro level. At the high school level, throwing accuracy is much more important than height (and at the pro level, but all quarterbacks at the pro level can throw accurately so height becomes a more important differentiators). Having high motivation can also make a huge difference. And I will tell you a story about that.

      Last time I played American football (with some friends), I saw in the eyes of one of my teammates that he was scared. And understandably so, he was short, some of the players on the other team were easily 10cm taller than us. All they would have to do is throw the ball over our heads and we could never catch it. So at that point I said to him, "Hey, you're the same height as Barry Sanders" (the aforementioned great runningback who was 167cm), "we can take them." And just saying that was enough to motivate him......he played amazingly well and stole the ball several times from those taller guys. If the quarterback had thrown it accurately, we never would have been able to intercept the ball, but the quarterback wasn't pro, so we found our opportunities and won.

      Anyway, Spud Webb showed that a person with a less than ideal body can compete, even in sports where height is everything.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    3. Re:fast twitch muscle? by dkleinsc · · Score: 1

      One of the things that makes rugby significantly different from other sports is that there are well-defined roles that are actually make shorter better (e.g. hooker). On the flip side, though, it helps to have second rowers and an 8 that are on the tall side, if only to catch lineouts.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
  13. What if your unborn child is a future computer gee by MichaelCrawford · · Score: 1

    -k?

    There are countries where ultrasounds are popular for determing the gender of unborn children. that way you can abort the girls.

    --
    Request your free CD of my piano music.
  14. from the ok-let's-watch-gattaca-again dept. by apcullen · · Score: 1

    tagline kinda says it all, doesn't it?

  15. Gattaca by bazald · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well, if that isn't the start of Gattaca-esque trait selection, I don't know what is. Just don't let anyone select candidates for sports on the basis of the gene, okay? Give people with or without the gene a chance of doing what they like best, regardless of the statistics.

    --
    Insert self-referential sig here.
    1. Re:Gattaca by bmo · · Score: 5, Funny

      Came looking for the Gattaca reference. Leaving satisfied.

      --
      BMO

    2. Re:Gattaca by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Black market for kid's sports gene test data created! That's pretty much what would happen.

    3. Re:Gattaca by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, not this one. The reason is that the percentage of fast twitch and slow twitch muscle fibres change depending on what you actually do. All the genetic test will do is show which type is easier to develop by training. In this case nurture will override nature.

    4. Re:Gattaca by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      And what a PC reason for selection of the (presence/lack) of the twitch gene. I wonder if a government might determine which soldiers are needed with which type of genes (twitch for infantry, no-twitch for snipers and UAV pilots), then tell the populace about a new program to win the Olympics in twenty years via genetic testing.

    5. Re:Gattaca by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 1

      Better than this; Eliminate competitive sports. Have these multi-million pound earning parasites do a real job instead of playing a game for sponsorship deals.

      Yes, I'm immensely impressed that you can throw a spear 120m. Now go fit a kitchen, or debug kernel code. Huh, guess you can just chuck spears far. Shame it's not too accurate, or you'd be really useful if we ever forgot how to make gunpowder.

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
  16. How to make superhumans by Hermanas · · Score: 1

    Step 1: Find a method to determine skill (in whatever desired area) from DNA.

    Step 2: Find a method to artificially combine two DNA strands that doesn't take more than a day or so.

    Step 3: Be able to grow a fully-functional human from the DNA generated in Step 2.

    Step 4: Start with the DNA of a few hundred people (preferably top athletes), and apply a evolutionary algorithm to combine, test, combine test, etc.

    Result: Within weeks, not centuries, you'll have the DNA for super-athletes, super-nerds or super-soldiers. We're almost there!

    1. Re:How to make superhumans by fonitrus · · Score: 1

      or the tried and tested method. 1. Enslave a race. 2. Bring the strong ones to your country. 3. Breed the strongest males with the toughest females. 4. Repeat the process for 500 years. 5. Abolish slavery and create the NBA and NFL. 6. DOMINATE!!!!!

    2. Re:How to make superhumans by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      And super slaves. The kind that are genetically engineered to depend on an artificial enzyme to survive. Should a slave flee, this neo-sapean would shortly die without daily or weekly injections. ST DS9 featured a race in which the founders did exactly that.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    3. Re:How to make superhumans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      2. Bring the strong ones to your country.

      The blacks sold as slaves to the New World weren't the strongest ones. The sellers were usually other African nations. And they sold as slaves people from other tribes they captured in wars.

    4. Re:How to make superhumans by oreiasecaman · · Score: 1

      super-nerds?! nooooooo... :)

      --
      This is a UDP joke, I don't care if you get it or not...
    5. Re:How to make superhumans by dkleinsc · · Score: 1

      There's one serious problem with making superhumans via genetic manipulation:

      Khaaaaaan!

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
  17. *sigh* by Zaldarr · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Ugh. Anyone who knows anything about genetics has the understanding that we do not know nearly enough what genes or combinations of make anything a dead cert. Yes, they can be indicators, but it all should be taken with all the grains of salt in the Dead Sea. But I will applaud the fact that someone, yet again, is making money off idiots. Good luck to them.

    --
    I write professional videogame reviews! http://www.digitallydownloaded.net/
  18. What *are* dwarves good at? by tepples · · Score: 1

    AC's ironic remark raises the question: in what sport would people of short stature have an advantage?

    1. Re:What *are* dwarves good at? by thopkins · · Score: 1

      Wrestling, gymnastics, motor sports, doesn't hurt you in soccer.

    2. Re:What *are* dwarves good at? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Equestrian

    3. Re:What *are* dwarves good at? by timeOday · · Score: 1

      Well, surviving a long, cold winter on meager rations isn't considered a "sport," so let's say... jockey?

    4. Re:What *are* dwarves good at? by chrb · · Score: 1

      Endurance activities where having a larger body means higher calorie burn to move it around. Ultra-marathoners tend to be short and slim. Also rock climbing, where obviously a larger frame means you are fighting gravity so much more. And any sport where participation is divided into categories based on weight: boxing, judo (lower center of gravity is good here too, also for gymnastics). And any sport where the ability to accelerate smaller mass limbs provides an advantage, table tennis might fit here.

    5. Re:What *are* dwarves good at? by chrb · · Score: 1

      Bigger Is Better, Except When It’s Not. Interesting article. They say distance running and cycling.

    6. Re:What *are* dwarves good at? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dwarf Bowling.

    7. Re:What *are* dwarves good at? by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

      Limbo dancing.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    8. Re:What *are* dwarves good at? by LordNacho · · Score: 1

      Some of the best dribblers in football are not very tall. Messi, Maradona, etc. It helps to have a low COG.

      You don't see so many of these little magicians though. One reason is that other people can learn to be good at dribbling too (look up TIPS Ajax Amsterdam), and if you're not amazing at it, stronger players will muscle you off the ball.

    9. Re:What *are* dwarves good at? by Mal-2 · · Score: 1

      AC's ironic remark raises the question: in what sport would people of short stature have an advantage?

      Baseball, if you have enough strength to get the ball "where they ain't". Smaller strike zone, faster around the bases, harder to tag, quicker first step on defense. Just ask this guy -- or for that matter, just about any middle infielder or center fielder until the Age of Steroids.

      --
      How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
  19. Re:What if your unborn child is a future computer by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 2

    Well, given that selective female infanticide is driven by an underlying set of economic beliefs, with a surface coating of culturally localized misogyny, I suspect that the ability to prenatally identify computer geeks is rapidly drawing to the end of where it would be used to select against them. The cultural layer is taking longer to break down; but the economics of being a geek vs. being an athlete haven't exactly been tilting in the athlete's favor lately...

    Incidentally, I always have to wonder how long it will take before countries with an enthusiasm for female infanticide will have it bite them in the ass and force a (likely very ugly) midcourse correction: Demanding dowries isn't going to work so well when there are 150 men per 100 women, and history suggests that young men with no real chance of getting married, or even getting laid, tend to take up unpleasant hobbies like crime and politics with considerable enthusiasm...

  20. Better Way by izomiac · · Score: 5, Informative

    A more accurate method of determining one's optimal sport is to do a muscle biopsy. It takes an insignificant amount of muscle and compares the ratio of fast, intermediate, and slow twitch muscle fibers. I highly doubt that a single gene can be used to reliably predict that ratio.

    OTOH, most people figure this out in childhood. Either you excel at sprinting, distance, or are mediocre at both. Plus, factors like body habitus play a greater effect than raw muscle composition, and practical experience is the only thing that factors everything in. But that's kinda irrelevant. Let the kid do what they like rather than push them into something they're most likely to win at. They'll probably wind-up picking their optimal sport anyway, and if their parents think the lost year or two of grade school training is a problem then there are some serious issues at hand.

    1. Re:Better Way by bmo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      But here's a question.

      Does certain types of sport encourage the growth of one type of muscle cell over another?

      Roger Williams noted that nearly all the native americans excelled at running if they weren't lame from injury. They did because they started running as little kids all the way through adulthood (Route 44 in RI is known as Wampanoag Trail, which was a running trail back in the day). The same can be said for what seems to be the national sport of Kenya - the reason why there are so many Kenyan champion runners is that it's what everybody does growing up.

      Also, fast twitch vs slow twitch does not take into account the dynamics of a person's skeleton. All the fast twitch in the world is not going to help you in sprinting when your bones aren't optimal for it.

      There are so many factors in being good at a sport, a single genetic test is not going to tell you anything. This is barely a step above waving a dead chicken, which will do more harm than good if you ask me.

      >Let the kid do what they like

      I can't agree more.
      --
      BMO

    2. Re:Better Way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wait a minute, now. You said you were leaving.

    3. Re:Better Way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does certain types of sport encourage the growth of one type of muscle cell over another?

      No, the proportion is determined at birth. Training can increase your muscle capacity by about one third at most, but it won't change the proportion between types of muscle cells. Training doesn't give you more muscle cells, the cells themselves grow.

      Roger Williams noted that nearly all the native americans excelled at running if they weren't lame from injury. They did because they started running as little kids all the way through adulthood (Route 44 in RI is known as Wampanoag Trail, which was a running trail back in the day). The same can be said for what seems to be the national sport of Kenya - the reason why there are so many Kenyan champion runners is that it's what everybody does growing up.

      In an environment where the ability to run matters, natural selection favors good runners.

    4. Re:Better Way by bmo · · Score: 1

      >In an environment where the ability to run matters, natural selection favors good runners.

      >implying that running has anything to do with natural selection in Kenya instead of the motivation to get money through winning races.

      Subtle troll is subtle.

      --
      BMO

    5. Re:Better Way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's very little evidence to suggest that merely practicing one sport will change your (largely) genetically-determined muscular composition.

      The reason why American Indians or Kenyans (or Jamaicans for that matter) have a reputation as runners is because running is the most popular sport in those populations. Everyone tries it at some point in their lives. When you throw the whole resources of a nation at one sport, you're going to consistently identify the best athletes in your population, who are as likely to be world-class as the best athletes in any other country. This is why South Americans have a reputation as the best soccer players in the world. Not because they are gifted in any way, but because all the best soccer players in the continent are identified and fielded in the World Cup. If the U.S. weren't obsessed with a diversity of other sports, we could do the same thing and potentially compete on the same level.

    6. Re:Better Way by bmo · · Score: 1

      >genetically-determined muscular composition.

      But we all train our muscles doing what we do.

      If it was pure genetics, training wouldn't matter, surely?

      --
      BMO

  21. Re:What if your unborn child is a future computer by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

    Sad but true. A bunch of savages people are.

    --
    Life is not for the lazy.
  22. Or... by v(*_*)vvvv · · Score: 2

    The parents could just look at themselves... A *ton* of pro athletes have pro athlete dads/moms. There is a reason why a lot of brothers and sisters make it together to the top tier. It's in their DNA, and the family knows it.

    And honestly, you want to look at the twitch muscle gene? How about height and build? You have to paint a picture that predicts accurately a child's build at 18. There is no one gene.

    1. Re:Or... by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      And honestly, you want to look at the twitch muscle gene? How about height and build? You have to paint a picture that predicts accurately a child's build at 18. There is no one gene.

      Height, build, reflexes, eyesight, cognitive abilities... There's a lot that goes into being good (or bad) at sports.

  23. I wonder if the logic holds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    [QUOTE]"They are categorized as capable of playing just about any type of sport they like"[/QUOTE]

    I am pretty sure that if the kids have all their limbs, and aren't mentally handicapped, that no matter what level of ACTN-III they might have, they qualify to play any sport they like.

    Kinda like anyone is capable of posting on slashdot, although some are more capable than others.

    1. Re:I wonder if the logic holds by Mal-2 · · Score: 1

      I am pretty sure that if the kids have all their limbs, and aren't mentally handicapped, that no matter what level of ACTN-III they might have, they qualify to play any sport they like.

      And maybe even if they don't. These are just the first ones that popped into my head.

      --
      How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
  24. republican health care plan uses tests preexisting by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 2

    Some day DNA tests will be used used to black list people on to the preexisting list if we keep the old system in place. This is down side to tests like this.

  25. Current athletes who shouldn't be in their sport? by themightythor · · Score: 1

    What'd be interesting to me is if you administered this test to current athletes and found the ones who the test wouldn't have predicted would be good. I can only think of a few sports where only one thing is the determinant for success. Those sports are typically ones in which you're not dealing with other people directly. So, track and field, and weightlifting. In every other sport that I can imagine, there's an element of having to react to another human being's actions. And sometimes, if you're really good at that and making appropriate decisions based on it, you can beat the guy with better size/speed/power.

  26. One isn't enough but it's a good start by erick99 · · Score: 1

    One gene and probably just one trait. How much can you infer from a single trait other than you have at least one ingredient for a recipe for whatever skill or gift is desired.

    --
    http://www.busyweather.com/
  27. How about no sports? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why does every single kid have to play sports now? It seems like every precious little snowflake HAS to be some wannabe sports superstar nowadays.

    Sports is a giant clusterfuck of machismo brainless competition garbage. There are much better ways to keep your kid active without signing them up to some stupid team sport bullshit where you (and them) have to spend every free moment in practice or at a game or some other bullshit, time better spent on education and LEARNING.

    But no, we don't want that. We want dumb kids to grow up playing or watching the sport-of-the-week and not having any real education so they're not smart enough to see how we, as a society, are pretty much fucked.

    1. Re:How about no sports? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We haven't decoded DNA well enough to create a test to determine whether or not little Johnny will be a mathlete yet.

    2. Re:How about no sports? by RobbieThe1st · · Score: 1

      Good point.
      Mod parent up.

    3. Re:How about no sports? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Must be pretty shitty to get picked last every time. Guess that what happens when you spend more time whining on slashdot then going outside though.

    4. Re:How about no sports? by f()rK()_Bomb · · Score: 2

      You can be good at sports get picked and still hate sports cause team mates are total dicks. I've yet to see a competitive team sport where the members arent dicks. I'll stick to alternative sports like skateboarding and snowboarding where we cheer for each other, not shout at teammates for mistakes.

      --
      "The space elevator will be built about 50 years after everyone stops laughing." - Arthur C. Clarke ~1980
    5. Re:How about no sports? by vlm · · Score: 1

      Why does every single kid have to play sports now? It seems like every precious little snowflake HAS to be some wannabe sports superstar nowadays.

      Its an acknowledgement that all other "stretch goals" have been permanently closed off to the point that even bothering to try is pointless. Start a business? Ha Ha not for you. Get a stable middle class job with benefits? Ha Ha not for you. Intentionally become a stay at home parent? Ha Ha not for you. Succeed in the arts? Ha Ha not for you. The only stretch goal left is pro sports, so thats the only one you still see.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    6. Re:How about no sports? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not necessarily disagreeing but... don't put down sports too much. I think ALL kids should be in some sports at some point past little league. It teaches you so many life skills. Ironically, one of the most important lessons you can learn is how to lose with grace and humility; so sucking at sports can actually make you a much better person.

    7. Re:How about no sports? by tys90 · · Score: 0

      I can relate to all those situations. I've been on teams with other members being dicks, I've been a dick on teams and I also snowboard. In my experience, on competitive teams, the biggest factor to people being poor teammates is chemistry. I've had teams with skilled players and we can't gel together and it just becomes a huge point of frustration. I've been on teams with mediocre overall skill level and we've played well together and it's a lot of fun.

      However, in youth teams there is an extra dynamic of the parents. Once you get into competitive adult sports people tend to police themselves - if they don't work together the team breaks up and tries with other people until they get a mix of the right teammates. This is true with pro sports as well. In youth sports, unless you move you are stuck with a group of teammates and parents, which can be a very bad situation. That's why I tend to agree with most people that youth sports need to chill out.

    8. Re:How about no sports? by Alex+Belits · · Score: 1

      So does starting or participating in an unsuccessful open source project. However it also teaches things that are actually useful.

      --
      Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
    9. Re:How about no sports? by thatshortkid · · Score: 1

      long-form and short-form strategy, hand-eye coordination, working with other towards a common goal, thinking (quite literally) on your feet. nope, can't think of a skill a kid could be LEARNING doing team sports. also, accountability. can't be an anonymous coward with your name plastered on your back.

      --
      The IRS is the one organization that you don't want to fuck with. Remember, these are the guys who took down Al Capone.
    10. Re:How about no sports? by benhattman · · Score: 1

      So, you had a negative experience, but that doesn't mean that sports are bad. When the goal of sports participation is to get those children to the professional level, it's clearly ridiculous. However, we are in the middle of an obesity epidemic; getting children off the couch and onto a practice field at least a few months a year is a noble objective. Likewise, sports are one of the few organized environments where we as a society teach that failure is OK. Missed a goal, basket, hit, or catch (even in a game)? That's alright so long as you practice and improve.

      I wouldn't really want to live in a country where those kinds of lessons aren't worth teaching. There's definitely a problem with the level of competition we apply to children in this country, but reactions like yours never improve anything.

  28. Starcraft is a sport? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    the gene behind what is called 'fast-twitch explosive muscles.'

    Sounds like competitive Starcraft ability right there. That's a sport right?

  29. Bad apples by Jazari · · Score: 1

    It's too bad that such crooks discredit the entire genome testing industry. I've personally been very satisfied with https://www.23andme.com/ , due in large part to their very rigorous criteria before claiming any effect from any particular gene.

  30. Re:I have a better test. by uncqual · · Score: 2

    You know, golf and tennis are "white folk" sports also. It's unfortunate that the Williams sisters and Tiger Woods didn't know that -- they could have saved themselves from the agony of success.

    --
    Why is there an "insightful" mod and why isn't it "-1"? If I wanted insight, I wouldn't be reading /.
  31. Football by GrahamCox · · Score: 1

    ...better suited for endurance sports like long distance running or swimming. Children that have a lot of it will be better suited for sports like football...

    Football IS an endurance sport. The amount of running needed over the full 90 minutes of a game is easily up there with some of the longest track events. Or did they mean some other game? (clue: if it's played exclusively with the feet it's football).

    1. Re:Football by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Football IS an endurance sport. The amount of running needed over the full 90 minutes of a game is easily up there with some of the longest track events.

      The players away from the ball are mostly standing still or adjusting their positions at walking pace. You don't usually see that on TV, though - the camera tends to follow the ball.

      if it's played exclusively with the feet it's football

      Headers. Goalkeepers.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  32. When in doubt, invade Poland. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's a great way to get rid of a lot of men.

    It's only bad if you're Polish or anyone else attacked, or anyone who comes to the defense of Poland, or...

    I wonder if blow up dolls could prevent World War III?

  33. Re:Current athletes who shouldn't be in their spor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't forget that one gene ain't gonna do shit if the stupid parents depend on it to do everything for them, and raise their kid on lard and high fructose corn syrup and a couch and TV...

  34. So, here's some old data by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Back in my serious cycling days the theory was that up until about 18-20 one could change the ratio of slow/fast twitch fibers in your muscles. The test was archaic: Stand next to a wall. Reach as high on the wall as you can. Make a mark on the wall. Then jump as high as you can and touch the wall. Have someone mark it. The ratio between the two marks was indicative of the amount of fast twitch muscle fibers you had. If you also had money you would just get a biopsy and be done with it. :)

    I happened to be a roadie but twitch didn't matter because I didn't have the competetive nature you also need to be a great cyclist (It's a great sport but it's stupidly brutal in its own way). Something for you lame-assed parents to remember if you're thinking of retiring on your child's suffering.

  35. Athletes depend on mind more than muscle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Anyone who wants to really go anywhere in any sport has to put a great deal of time into training. That's often not very fun, and a lot of it is done totally alone, like starting out each day by running a few miles, even if the weather is crappy.

    While having the right kind of muscles for the sport will contribute to one's success, far more important is the mental determination and discipline.

    By contrast, there are plenty of highly overweight couch potatoes who have lost all their weight and achieved good health and good looks through regular exercise and improved diet. It doesn't matter how badly out of shape you are, if you can get the mindset to be physically fit, you can achieve it.

    I rather enjoy heavy physical exercise, but I avoid sports like the fucking plague. There is just about nothing about any sport that I enjoy. But as a child I was always heavily into bicycling. I would ride off many, many miles farther than my parents ever realized I was going, or that today's parents would allow their children to ride unaccompanied.

    The difference between cycling for me and most other sports is that I don't compete, nor do I ride with others. I do it for the experience of cycling, and not for what I can achieve.

    Now suppose my parents had sensed my innate interest in cycling and pushed me to be an olympic cycler. That would have made my childhood a living Hell.

    I don't see any good coming from this test. Kids get plenty of opportunity to find out what sports they are good at in gym class. All I see coming from this test is that parents will try to fulfill their sick fantasies by forcing their kids into sports that they have the genetic markers for, but no real desire to participate in.

  36. Missing option by __aajfby9338 · · Score: 1

    So, lots of ACTN-three makes children well-suited for football and the like, while no ACTN-three makes them well-suited for long distance running and so forth. And a medium level of ACTN-3 lets kids play any sport they like. But which gene makes children well-suited for slouching on the sofa while cramming Cheesy-Poofs into their pie-holes?

  37. Scammers gonna scam. by Lord+Kano · · Score: 1

    Sure, genetics have a lot to do with success at sport but will and determination are far more important.

    LK

    --
    "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
    1. Re:Scammers gonna scam. by Iberian · · Score: 1

      Depends on the sport. No amount of dedication will get Shaq into the Kentucky derby unless he is the one with the jockey on his back.

    2. Re:Scammers gonna scam. by Lord+Kano · · Score: 1

      Excellent counter-point. Just as no amount of will or determination is going to get Verne Troyer into the NBA.

      LK

      --
      "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
  38. Who cares what they're good at?! by ciaran_o_riordan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Producing a top sportsperson is not the goal of raising a child.

    They should be raised healthy, happy, and with good habits.

    They have to be encouraged to do whatever form of sport/exercise they are willing/happy to do.

    1. Re:Who cares what they're good at?! by quantaman · · Score: 2

      To play the devil's advocate producing a top sportsman isn't the only reason one might want this test.

      You want them "to be encouraged to do whatever form of sport/exercise they are willing/happy to do."

      Well two big factors in enjoying sport are a) having some talent for it, and b) being able to improve at it. If they have success they're more likely to stay active, and healthy. That doesn't mean forcing them into a sport, but I think guiding a child towards areas where they have potential is good parenting.

      --
      I stole this Sig
    2. Re:Who cares what they're good at?! by ciaran_o_riordan · · Score: 1

      > To play the devil's advocate [...]

      If that argument has any value, then it has an equal negative value because by telling the child they're born to do one of the two sports categories, you're also telling them they're not born to the other category.

      But I don't think the argument has significant value. Factors such as living near a pool/mountain/pitch, and whether their friends are involved in a particular sport, and whether their school has good (motivating) coaches are much bigger factors, and you're much better off letting the child do what they choose rather than guiding them to certain sports and away from certain others.

  39. Re:What if your unborn child is a future computer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    young men with no real chance of getting married, or even getting laid, tend to take up unpleasant hobbies like slashdot with considerable enthusiasm...

    Fix'd

  40. "Have a lot of it"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Having a lot of a gene is an interesting concept. Does it somehow metastisize?

    1. Re:"Have a lot of it"? by quantaman · · Score: 1

      I don't know anything about the gene in question (nor a ton about genetics), but it is possible to have "a little" or "a lot" of a gene instead of 0, 1, or 2. There can be multiple copies of a gene on a single chromosome, and this could cause more of the associated protein to be created, and thus enhance whatever effect that gene has. I don't know how common this is in nature, but I know they recreate some neurological diseases in lab mice by inserting multiple copies of the affected gene into the the genome.

      --
      I stole this Sig
  41. This is a scam by tbird81 · · Score: 1

    Well, not really a scam, but it's incredibly overpriced and gives you no useful information. That gene has very little effect outside of maybe the elite of the elite. Your body shape contributes much much more to your "ideal" sport. (More important is what the kid enjoys.)

    For $200, you can test 500,000 SNPs with 23andMe, get much more useful health info plus ancestry information.

    My result from 23andMe:
    rs1815739:CT "One working copy of alpha-actinin-3 in fast-twitch muscle fiber. Many world-class sprinters and some endurance athletes have this genotype."

    I've actually seen a number of companies that test for a few SNPs, charging $hundreds and making misleading claims. I can't say for sure if they're fly-by-nighters out to make a buck, but there are much cheaper ways of getting more information.

    1. Re:This is a scam by smchris · · Score: 1

      Totally agree on the price. 23andme.com periodically runs specials at $99, they've even done FREE+S&H, (with $9/month for a year commitment) and provides a ton of results on disease susceptibility, carrier status, traits, and continuing results as research comes in plus their ancestry and "cousins" angle, message boards, and informative blogs.

      I don't know. They say I'm "CC" with two working copies of ACTN3 and I've never played "football, rugby, wrestling, or hockey" but I did finish three marathons in my early thirties. Seems like total reflex response time often has more practical value in sports than just "fast twitch muscle response" so it wouldn't surprise me if assessing the value of ACGN3 gets fuzzy.

  42. Ticker Symbol Please! by mevets · · Score: 1

    There is nothing better than a good scam I am in on. Desperate parents are a great source of revenue.

    "... did we tell you name of the game boy,
    we call it riding the gravy train."
    [pf wywh].

  43. Some more info re: the gene by tbird81 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Shameless (and copyvio) copy/paste from 23andMe:

    This gene produces a protein called alpha-actinin-3 that is only turned on in fast-twitch muscle fibers (the kind used for power events like sprinting or weightlifting). The protein forms part of the contractile machinery in muscle cells, where it is thought to play both structural and signalling roles.

    The T version of the SNP in this gene prevents the full protein from being made. People with two copies of the T version thus have a total lack of alpha-actinin-3 in their fast-twitch muscle fibers. Those with the CT genotype have one functional copy of the gene and can still make the protein.

    Surprisingly, a complete lack of the alpha-actinin-3 protein doesn't seem to cause any type of disease. This is probably because another closely related protein can step in for alpha-actinin-3 in people without a functional copy. The substitute protein likely does not perform its job as well as alpha-actinin-3, resulting in worse performance in power exercises.

    Despite lack of a disease outcome, researchers wondered if the absence of alpha-actinin-3 might have an effect on athletic performance. Studies of elite athletes in Australia and Finland showed that power athletes—those whose performance depends on fast-twitch muscle fibers—were much more likely to have at least one working copy of the gene than non-athletes. In one study of Olympic power athletes (i.e., the best of the best), all had at least one working copy. Similar results were found in a study of Spanish professional soccer players.

    But does alpha-actinin-3 make a difference for non-athletes? In fact, it does.

    One study looked at a group of Greek teenagers who had been tested for a variety of fitness measures related to power and endurance sports. In this group, ACTN3 genotype had no effect on the girls, but boys with the TT genotype were significantly slower in a 40 m sprint. Interestingly, running was the only power event that the different versions of ACTN3 seemed to affect. For activities like throwing a basketball or jumping into the air, performance was unaffected by genotype.

    Another study looked at arm strength in a group of people before and after 12 weeks of strength training. ACTN3 genotype appeared to have no effect in men, but women with the TT genotype had lower strength at the beginning of the study. After the training program women with the TT genotype—those without a working copy of alpha-actinin-3—had made greater gains than the women with at least one functioning copy. This was true in both European and Asian women.

    Scientists aren't really sure why having alpha-actinin-3 would improve power performance. One theory is that the protein prevents damage in fast-twitch muscle fibers. The group who conducted the study of Greek teenagers thinks this explains why only running and not other power activities were affected by a lack of alpha-actinin-3. Running involves repeated use of the muscles, while jumping only uses muscles once: damage is not an issue.

    The scientists who saw that women with the TT genotype were able to build up more strength than other women also think alpha-actinin-3 protects muscle fibers from damage. Muscle damage is what stimulates muscles to adapt and become stronger. Those with the TT genotype lack the protection against damage that alpha-actinin-3 normally provides, thus allowing a greater gain in strength.

    Alpha-actinin-3 may also affect athletic performance by virtue of its effects on oxygen usage in muscle. Two studies (one in mice and one in humans) have shown that fast-twtich muscle fibers that lack functional copies of ACTN3 use more oxygen than those with at least one working copy. This type of metabolism might slow them down. Mice studies have also shown that these altered fibers are weaker and smaller than fibers containing alpha-actinin-3, but they are more efficient an resistant to fatigue—a situation that is better suited to endurance sports than sprinting.

    1. Re:Some more info re: the gene by geekmux · · Score: 1

      ...One study looked at a group of Greek teenagers who had been tested for a variety of fitness measures related to power and endurance sports. In this group, ACTN3 genotype had no effect on the girls, but boys with the TT genotype were significantly slower in a 40 m sprint. Interestingly, running was the only power event that the different versions of ACTN3 seemed to affect.

      Amazing. Years of research at a cost of likely hundreds of thousands(millions?) of dollars to find out what I knew by the time I was twelve years old and could outrun 98% of the kids on the playground. Ever wonder HOW many professional track athletes and runners in the sport today found out they were REALLY good at what they do? Chances are it wasn't a damn machine or DNA test that told them.

      This is all about money, nothing more. The further "fine-tuning" of professional sports to create the "next generation" of competitors. How long before we get fed up with limitations of the flesh and decide to start building cyborgs to compete?

  44. Pick a sport they enjoy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You know, the kid will be good at the sport they ENJOY, rather than one determined by a DNA test.

    Our middle child plays Rugby Union, a sport we would never have picked in a million years. But we discovered it, tried it, he enjoyed it, and 6 years later, he is still at it.

    Tests be damned.

  45. AKA: The Vincent Freeman Gene by cmholm · · Score: 2

    > So where's the "I really want to do it" gene?

    Right on. That was the core message from "Gattica", that the will to do it can mean more than the theoretical ability to... as I saw all too many times in high school and university.

    Until we plug into that, the ACTN-3 is going to be just the beginning of a long, painful road.

    --
    Luke, help me take this mask off ... Just for once, let me butterfly kiss you with my own eyes.
  46. Re:What if your unborn child is a future computer by epyT-R · · Score: 1

    don't worry, if used for gender bigotry, the institutionalized misandry of today will ensure that the technique will be used to abort boys first...and it won't get mentioned by the media and no one will care.

  47. You forgot the little well-known fact... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...that a too small challenge is just as bad as a too big one. They get bored. Exactly like with a game that's too easy. Like those who were bad at school because they were bored.

    Game designers and motivation experts know, that it's the difference of your skill level and the difficulty level of your task that demotivates. The closer they are, the more motivating it will be. And genius is a high skill at choosing tasks of the difficulty that's closest to your skills. As there is no such thing as "being born a genius" or "talent". (Ok, genius secondly also requires the ability to structure one's thoughts, so that they are always in few enough groupings that they can stay in active short-term memory at the same. Naturally in a association graph.)

    The essence of all learning and sports⦠is simply games. If you can make a good game, you can make a good environment for your kids to learn and improve in. That's it.

    1. Re:You forgot the little well-known fact... by ShakaUVM · · Score: 1

      >>...that a too small challenge is just as bad as a too big one. They get bored. Exactly like with a game that's too easy. Like those who were bad at school because they were bored.

      Exactly. But it depends on personality. While I think the evidence in Outliers is fairly compelling (at least that there's a *bias* toward kids on the upper end of their age brackets), being the youngest in my class (starting 1st grade at the age of 5, started college at 16) I ended up becoming very competitive with older kids, trying to work against their advantage and experience, and ended up doing quite well in high school as a result (a valedictorian and countywide co-MVP in my sport). My whole family is competitive, though... my paternal great-grandmothers were absolutely ruthless at cards, talking trash and never giving quarter, even to small kids... and you can still see that at the family reunions, where their great-great-grandkids are walking around with decks of cards, talking trash and challenging their elders to play hearts with them.

      For my sister, though, it sort of had the opposite effect. She, at some point, decided that she couldn't compete, and sort of gave up. So I'm not saying it's a panacea or anything - but I do think healthy competition is good for kids.

    2. Re:You forgot the little well-known fact... by RivenAleem · · Score: 1

      I don't see a mention of sports in your post anywhere. How well did you do at physical games? Wait, you're on /. I think I know the answer to that.

    3. Re:You forgot the little well-known fact... by Calydor · · Score: 1

      co-MVP at my sport

      You're blind. You should go get some even bigger dork glasses.

      See, it cuts both ways.

      --
      -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
    4. Re:You forgot the little well-known fact... by ShakaUVM · · Score: 1

      >>I don't see a mention of sports in your post anywhere. How well did you do at physical games? Wait, you're on /. I think I know the answer to that.

      As the other poster said, you failed at reading comprehension. I was one of two MVPs in San Diego County for varsity men's volleyball my senior year, and won various other awards as well. So it worked out pretty well, and sort of serves as a counterexample to Gladwell's age thesis (though by high school, the difference between a 12 year old and a 13 year old is perhaps as profound as between a 5 year old and a 6 year old... though in some ways it is). However, my success did correlate with his other thesis about needing to put in many hours of intensive work to get really good at something - I helped coach the women's volleyball team during the fall quarter, our school had an optional volleyball club running during the winter that I signed up for, and then varsity men's volleyball during the spring quarter. We'd also go to various community gyms around the county when they'd host volleyball nights, to get extra practice in, too. I was pretty terrible my freshman year, but all the time I put in got me a starting position on the varsity team my sophomore year, and we won our league every year after that.

      I'd have continued playing at UC San Diego, but it would have entailed missing class every Friday, and spending 20 hours a week doing unpaid janitorial service in the school gym. Since my classes had quizzes every Friday, and I wasn't willing to compromise my academics, I ended up just playing club and community volleyball, and still do.

      Complete enough response for you? Not every person on Slashdot is a couch potato.

    5. Re:You forgot the little well-known fact... by RivenAleem · · Score: 1

      I didn't recognise the significance of co-MVP, but that's due to my own ignorance I'll admit, I suspect it's a more commonly used term in the states, I've never heard it used here in Ireland.

      Back to the topic though:

      You're saying you didn't get a volleyball team starting position until sophomore year. Can you think back to people who had been on various teams through the age brackets all the way up through school, and what age they are/were relative to their peers?

      Nothing in the thesis says that you can't have some measure of success being the younger person later on when age is less of a divider, and what's needed is hard work and practice.

      You have yet to offer anything that invalidates the arguments above.

      Your original post looked to me like you valued your competitiveness on an intellectual level greater than the 5 words you offered to sport, when this article is all about sport, so you have to forgive the misunderstanding.

      This is not about being a couch potato, but about being successful at competitive levels of sport based on your genetics. While playing and coaching volleyball for your university is a laudable achievement, it is not within the scope of the article. The ability to genetically test children to identify what sports they would be suitable for, is an attempt to pick one they can be highly successful (I'm thinking Olympics) at later on in life, by putting them on the path really early on.

      The counter argument, of this thread, is it really doesn't matter that much, what is more important is to put the child into a sport where they will always have an age advantage, which will build confidence and success.

      I would subscribe to a combination of both, where you find out a list of suitable sports, then pick one where they got the age advantage also. It's no use when someone reaches the age of 20, at a professional level, where everyone is 19.5 but they are better suited, genetically, to the sport.

    6. Re:You forgot the little well-known fact... by RivenAleem · · Score: 1

      "The term "Most Valuable Player" is typically only used in Canada, the United States, the Philippines and South Korea."

      Courtesy of Wikipedia
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Most_Valuable_Player

      Perhaps I should Google every TLA I don't understand when I read /. posts, or perhaps people should be more aware that there are countries outside the US and make their posts more internationally understood, but then we might have world peace which is bad for business.

      Either way, in thread about sporting achievements, in an article about genetic testing for the purpose of sporting achievements, the parent really went to a lot of trouble to outline sporting achievements...

      His follow up post was very informative, but still doesn't win the argument for age vs hard work.

    7. Re:You forgot the little well-known fact... by dokc · · Score: 1

      "The term "Most Valuable Player" is typically only used in Canada, the United States, the Philippines and South Korea."

      Courtesy of Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Most_Valuable_Player

      Term MVP is also used in European basketball competitions.

      --
      In love, war and slashdot discussions, everything is allowed.
  48. Bah why is this needed? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not too hard to figure out if both Mom and Dad are fast, that you might be fast, and vice versa.

    Generally the apples don't fall far from the tree.

  49. any type of sport they like. by Culture20 · · Score: 1

    Children that don't have ACTN-three will be better suited for endurance sports like long distance running or swimming. Children that have a lot of it will be better suited for sports like football, rugby, wrestling, or hockey. Kids that have some ACTN-three will not be the fastest and not the slowest, they don't burn out the quickest and they don't last the longest. They are categorized as capable of playing just about any type of sport they like.

    Better hope your kid is in the third group, otherwise it's a crap shoot as to whether they'll be forced into sports they don't like.

  50. 350 degrees for 25 minutes, turning once by hedgemage · · Score: 1

    Um... is fast twitch muscle fiber more, uh, tender when cooked? I'm just asking... and how early will we know which children have more of it? Can these kids maybe have some kind of labeling system so that if some of them come near my cave or cross my bridge I'll be able to recognize them?
    I'm really wondering if children gifted with more this kind of muscle fiber would be better stewed or roasted.
    Thanks for taking the time to answer, I know that we trolls have a bit of a bad rep on the internet due to a certain subspecies. We're not all bad guys, some of us just want to catch and eat children, not ruin your enjoyment of message boards.

    1. Re:350 degrees for 25 minutes, turning once by tbird81 · · Score: 1

      Actually, the reason that some parts of chicken are white (e.g breast) while others are more brown (e.g. legs) is because of the type of muscle.

      Slow twitch has more mitochondria, so is browner. Fast twitch is whiter meat.

      So it's your personal preference as to the children you will eat.

  51. Life mimicing fiction by englishstudent · · Score: 1

    GATTACA

    --
    We'll never make it.......oh! we made it! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SWf3iJjqYCM&list=FL7kKrE4eTs17mQl7eyvJIOg
  52. Mothers from Hell by G3ckoG33k · · Score: 2

    Former East Bloc (i.e. communist eastern Europe) looked at the proportion of red/white muscles to see who would become explosive or athlete. This is an extension, but down to the family level... Even worse.

    Thinking of the busy-body moms in today's China. Poor, poor kids. Jwish moms used to be seen as bad, overreacting psycho-freaks

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/wendy-sachs/chinese-moms-vs-jewish-mo_b_807569.html

    but, the Chinese are worse.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704111504576059713528698754.html

    Soccer moms and Hockey dads, for what reason?

    Calm down, all you mothers from Hell.

    1. Re:Mothers from Hell by CaptainChuck · · Score: 1

      Having grown up being taught that "All men are created equal", it is a rude shock to discover that the Creator has not made it so. No wonder the subject is argued so fervently.

    2. Re:Mothers from Hell by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      CaptainChuck: "Having grown up being taught that "All men are created equal", it is a rude shock to discover that the Creator has not made it so."

      The problem is rather that "All women's _children_ are not created equal". That the mother is one of the two Creators here does not justify their behavior. If you meant something else with the "Creator" you are on darn thin ice.

      These (I wish I could justify writing 'motherfuckers') mothers overdo it on a level which will pay off, but for someone else, only...

  53. Re:republican health care plan uses tests preexist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Some day DNA tests will be used used to black list people...

    You mean in the same way that Slashdot posting is used now?

  54. Useless measure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Really is a useless measure. I used to be very athletic, engaging in skating, mountain biking, street hockey, swimming, baseball, even broke a local record on the track (which I think is still the record now). Everyone was so sure I would someday be an athlete they could be proud to call a friend.

    Well the joke was on them, and the fallout was on me. All of those sports had one thing in common: no matter how much you tried, and how careful you were, you got injured. I stacked up so many injuries that the hospital I go to knew my name without having to look at the charts.

    I've always enjoy writing code (in any language except javascript). It really wasn't until I stopped to consider what my future would be like if I continued to punish my body, that I finally settled on a language of choice and took off with it. Yep all those poor people that just knew I'd be a famous athlete some day, none of them even give me the time of day now. It really pissed me off when I went to one of them in particular, whom runs a local software company, and he wouldn't stop for 5 minutes to accept my resume.

  55. If you don't mind me asking... by ryzvonusef · · Score: 1

    Could you explain a bit more about your children and your sporting abilities?

    Since this post is about sports and genetics, I am wondering, what are your and your wife's sporting abilities? Are you two also swimmers?

    Also, what made both your kids swimmers? Did they naturally incline that way, or was it, as the article seems to indicate, something genetic? Or perhaps something in the environment (Access to swimming pool early in the age, all kids their age choose swimming etc...)

    What about their capabilities in other sports? Do they have trouble performing sports of the wrong ACTN group?

    Lastly, do you believe in this theory? And would you have performed that test and chosen accordingly?

    --
    I am an ACCA student. Got a query on Accountancy/Finance? Maybe I can help!
    1. Re:If you don't mind me asking... by cptdondo · · Score: 1

      My wife was a good distance runner - placed a lot in her age group and had a couple of top-three finishes in regional marathons. Me, I'm not so good. I have good endurance but no speed. I also don't like to compete (a result of a pushy parent - if you can't win, why bother doing it?) so I tend to pick events that have no prizes. I ride road bikes; 100+ miles, up mountains, etc. Neither of us is a swimmer (which is probably why our kids like it so much. :-) ) We have a really good swim club near our house (within walking distance) so it's a good after school activity. Maybe if we had a fencing club they'd be fencers; who knows.

      My 14 year old daughter is more of an endurance type. She is competitive in triathlons with adult women; sprint times of 1:28 or so. My son is a fart in a whirlwind; typical for an 11 year old boy, he'll do anything and try anything. Full-contact american football is the only thing I won't let him do. He's small for his age, and he'd get creamed out there. Injuries at that age are too permanent.

  56. Bolt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sorry Mrs Bolt, but it looks like little Usain will grow much too tall to be a sprinter. Try basketball instead.

  57. An unwanted child. by TapeCutter · · Score: 2

    The universal reason for an abortion is an "unwanted child", why does the reason it is unwanted matter? Why do we question the motivations behind abortion, but not other forms of contraception?

    There are a bazillion reasons why the parent doesn't want the kid, and most of them have nothing to do with health, they include such reasons as; "I don't want stretch marks", "I can't afford it", "I would need a bigger car", and "I can't afford a girl". Once you start requiring people to state a "legitimate" reason for not wanting the child, you turn some simple but controversial yes/no legislation into a minefield of legal "what if's". The end result being that even relatively stupid people will just pick a reason from the "legitimate" list and lie, thus burying any hard evidence of "gender bigotry" or "gender economics".

    Besides, we have our own glass house of cultural absurdities, eg: google "circumcision deaths", now think that "serious complications" is probably 10X that number, we can't blame economics for that one so, "gender bigotry" it is!

    --
    And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
  58. Baby sports? by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

    Kids don't start to do any real sports until they are at least a few years old, by which time any half-decent parent will have already noticed what their kid is good at. Nobody needs this test.

    --
    Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
  59. Totally wrong approach by biancmb · · Score: 0

    Oh my goodness: exactly like in GATTACA. Who cares about what your child could excel at, let him do what he enjoys most. We would not have had any Einstein, etc. etc... otherwise.

  60. Re:I have a better test. by Noughmad · · Score: 1

    Golf and tennis are "rich folk" sports, and historically rich people were mostly white. Fortunately, this is less true now than it was a couple of decades ago.

    Hockey, on the other hand, is more of a "white folk" sport because of the conditions (ice is not a natural habitat for black people) than because of the cost or elitism.

    --
    PlusFive Slashdot reader for Android. Can post comments.
  61. The "Overbearing Parent" gene by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I broke up with my fiancee, a life-long figure skater, after being together for seven years.

    I did this because it became apparent that she intended to throw our own future children into the meat-grinder in order to raise a "super kid." It was her intention that our child would grow up learning at least one musical instrument; be bilingual by default (international parents) yet tutored in a third and, of course, compete in figure skating and continue on to national then international figure skating, or until figure skating turned them into a half-cripple like their mother.

    Why a woman with permanently damaged vertebrae, two trick shoulder-joints from multiple dislocations and serious knee/ankle problems would wish this on her child, well... Let's just say I hope she never has children for the sake of everyone involved.

    The odd thing is, her parents never pushed her it all. So I'm thinking it's genetics that gave her this incredibly selfish, competitive streak.

  62. What if they weigh 300lbs? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Will junior still be good at football?

  63. too expensive compared to 23andme.com by holyshitagain · · Score: 1

    23andme.com will genotype 1,000,000 markers (SNPs) for $99 + a year of subscription at $9/month. So you get the ACTN3 allele (variation) plus many other genes ... for over 200 disease risks and traits: https://www.23andme.com/health/all/

  64. Hunting Greed for sport. by geekmux · · Score: 1

    "Parents are being sold on the idea of buying DNA tests for their kids, to find out which sports they will be better at..."

    Translation: Parents are spending money on DNA tests to see how quickly they can live vicariously through their children's accolades, and (more importantly) find out how quickly their child can ink a seven-figure sports contract so the parents can retire and sit on their ass living off their children's accolades.

    "...They are categorized as capable of playing just about any type of sport they like."

    Wow. A $180 test has actually replaced a good parent leaning over and asking little Johnny, "So, Johnny, what sport would you like to play?"...I don't suppose the concept of the child actually picking the sport, you know, just for fun, because they might actually enjoy playing, is still alive, is it? Just a thought.

  65. Here's my concern by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This will become yet one more thing some parents use to put unrealistic expectations on their kids. Sure, physical traits determine one's aptitude for sport (DUH); but almost all of us will never play at a level that has any financial impact on our lives; let alone at that elite pro level. Even at the top pro level the competition is so tough that few make a viable career of it.

    So now some parents will ratchet up their expectations and further push their kids towards an unrealistic goal. Instead of playing a sport because you enjoy it and reaping the benefits of that, they will be pushed into what they are good at.

    Real ability is a lucky combination of physical gifts, mental gifts and hard work. Even within a family one person may have it and another will be at best a journeyman player. Even so, as other's have pointed out a better marker may be having parent and grandparent or two that were world class athletes. Even then, you may just be a regression towards the mean.

    Of course, no one ever went broke betting on the stupidity of the American public or on the sports parent's willingness to shell out for any edge.

    I truly feel sorry for the kids - sports should be fun and a way to socialize; not yet another thing you must compete at and win for your parent's sake.

    Now, "GET OFF MY GRASS!!!"

    --
    I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    1. Re:Here's my concern by thesandtiger · · Score: 2

      The problem isn't tests like this, but people who are bad parents.

      A good parent could, if they even bothered with this kind of testing, use it in concert with their child's natural inclinations and interests to help suggest things the child might have more potential at, or expose them to those things. For a child who is very performance/mastery oriented, being pointed at something they could enjoy AND potentially be great at would be a boon.

      A bad parent would use the results of such a test to browbeat their kid into doing things or to attack them for any failure to achieve the best possible results.

      --
      Since I can't tell them apart, I treat all ACs as the same person.
  66. Hate against performance improvement by vlm · · Score: 1

    Why all the hate toward performance improvement? If the genetic marker they were searching for indicated likely knee trouble, so they could advise kids with weak knees to take up no-impact swimming, I bet there wouldn't be the 1984 style "two minutes hate". Oh your son has the genetic marker for unrepairable shoulder injury? I see we have our next track and field long distance runner candidate, etc.

    I could see that being abused, much like the XX chromosome results in speaking dolls that say "math is hard". But sports related health and safety results would probably not be hated as much as sports related performance results.

    --
    "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
  67. Retirement! by witherstaff · · Score: 1

    And here I thought kids could be a retirement plan. Produce a well paid pro and the parents are set. Heck there are even tv commercials about this - family teaching their 5 year old to dunk... so it must be true.

  68. On the 7 yr. old being yelled @ especially by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Per the subject line, that's the mark of a failed athlete trying 2 live out his OWN FAILED dreams thru his kid. You're right on that type too, they're ASSHOLES! I'm with you on "do what you love because you want to". There was this NFL athlete, Todd Marinovich iirc? He was a product of what you speak of... in the end, it brought nothing but misery to he and failure. He never wanted it, it was forced on he essentially. Not all of those kids fail, some DO excel under pressure, but I imagine it's those that DO genuinely love the sport they play (the only thing that "saves them from failure" here is probably that imo & experience).

    The type of jerks you describe are bigtime PERSONAL FAILURE DRIVEN ASSHOLES (by their own personal failures, into being a tyrant to their own child - pricks like that shouldn't be allowed to reproduce). I know, I had one for a parent.

    Coming from someone who had a parent like that, whom I despise to this day and I always did. The "push" they gave me wasn't in athletics though, it was in academics (& I was NJHS in Highschool, could have been FULL NHS but I just didn't give a damn in my senior year in the 1 honors english course I took since I had all my credits to graduate out & already had college lined up for sure). No matter how well you did, it was NEVER GOOD ENOUGH to this person. They are the type you describe, yes, I know... I lived a life with one & am sadly having to sit back and watch this same parent do the same to a niece of mine/grandchild of hers.

    I was a decent athlete in my day too (NCAA starter & letterman in a rough sport called lacrosse), as well as a student (but from what I have seen in this world, your grades and academic performance aren't a guarantee of anything. It's more of a combination of yes, what you know (so others can use you up & burn you out on that account), and WHO you know (who are the users I speak of above)).

    Took me nearly 1/2 a century to figure all of that out, & I'll warn any kid of what's really out there, and what's coming for you - a DIRTY world that's mostly quite unfair where the rich keep getting richer and fucking over anyone or anything in their way, bending or remaking laws (lobbyists anyone) to do so, or worse (killing others either in wars enmasse, or individuals). already had college lined up for sure). No matter how well you did, it was NEVER GOOD ENOUGH to this person. They are the type you describe, yes, I know... I lived a life with one.

    I was a decent athlete in my day too (NCAA starter

  69. You know what sport any kid is best at? by JustAnotherIdiot · · Score: 1

    The one they enjoy.

    Sure they might be better suited for another sport, but anyone will always exceed and try harder at the one they actually want to play.

    --
    What do I know, I'm just an idiot, right?
  70. fuck sports by spidercoz · · Score: 1

    what about a test to tell if your spawn won't be a fucking idiot?

    --
    "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - Evelyn Beatrice Hall, re Voltaire
    1. Re:fuck sports by Alex+Belits · · Score: 2

      "Are you an idiot?"

      --
      Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
  71. Genetic's dirty little secret by fropenn · · Score: 1

    is that they don't always know which genes result in which traits. In fact, it could be possible to have the "fast-twitch" ability based on a different presentation or combination of genes. So not having these specific gene expressions does NOT absolutely guarantee that someone won't have this fast-twitch ability.

    Our genetics understanding is just not advanced enough to say definitively that this gene expression = this ability / trait for most traits of interest.

  72. The thing about Gattaca by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    is that the protagonist really did have a bad heart and make himself the navigator of a starship. He really is likely to die and hinder the mission of the entire ship. The selfish bastard put his dreams ahead of the lives of the entire crew.

  73. How about a test called "Avoidance of Errors".... by zawarski · · Score: 1

    https://www.23andme.com/health/Avoidance-of-Errors/ .. had the dna thing done for ancestry and noticed this was only $10 more. Checked the box before really thinking about how the results might be viewed by teachers, future employers, myself...

  74. LOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If there were a test to determine soemthing similar retaled to intelligence most of you would be first in line to have your kid checked. You may not place much value in athletics (face it.. you post on slashdot chances are you arent too athletically gifted) so you may think this is worthless or used by loser parents who live vicariously through their children (as many "sports parents" do) but in the same sense many of you nerds do the same thing with your own children in the fields of sceince/engineering etc.. doesnt really make you much different.

  75. All children, regardless of DNA, are... by NotPeteMcCabe · · Score: 1

    ...capable of playing just about any type of sport they like. Take the money you saved on the test and buy your kid a bicycle.

  76. Re:republican health care plan uses tests preexist by Alex+Belits · · Score: 1

    black list people

    Something is wrong with the words order in this sentence.

    --
    Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
  77. Re:I have a better test. by dkleinsc · · Score: 1

    An even better counterargument: Association football ("soccer" to Americans) is widely played by people of every race and nationality from just about every social background imaginable. There's absolutely no statistically significant pattern of race and skill at the game.

    --
    I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
  78. Re:I have a better test. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The whole reason for the genetic divergence in melanin in skin was due to the degree of sunlight. There is a pretty obvious inverse correlation between degree of sunlight and ice. ;)

  79. Breaking that one to your kids by TheUSADebate.com · · Score: 1

    So I guess the starting point would be to have a parent have their kids taken to this DNA testing place to test for which sports their kids would be good at and kid turns out to have great fast twitch muscles but wants to run cross country as his/her sport..... is a parent really going to be like no your not made for that? No, the kid is going to play whatever they want to play and so this is a waste of time and money. If you have a professional athlete in the making in your household you will find it out in a hurry and don't need a DNA sample to prove it - just let the kids play