Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

You really can't discount the study of epigenetics as a modern field, simply because Lamarck and Lysenko were incorrect over a century ago.



No, but I definitely can discount one study because two other people that claimed similar things were proven wrong (and Lysenko was less than a century ago). Although I can't tell in this case whether they're claiming anything other than hormone levels in the mother during pregnancy might impact development (which is another reason I'm extremely skeptical of any stronger claims made in the article)


I wouldn't discount it. But the more a published scientific finding spins a narrative that would confirm people's existing sensitivities, the more evidence it takes for me to be convinced it is true. Because of all false scientific findings (which most are: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1182327/), the ones that are most likely to virally propagate despite being false are the ones that people want to be true.

So the more I can imagine someone nodding their head and saying "yeah, that totally makes sense," the more I am skeptical of the study until I see some pretty solid evidence.

(I haven't looked at the evidence for this at all, so have no opinion on it).




Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: