Thread by @AdamRutherford

Some thoughts, for @toadmeister,
who has responded (I can't work out how to thread this further, for which I apologise; does Storify still exist?).

It is indeed important that we continue to discuss the ethics raised by new techniques and old principles - possibly for no other reason than to expose the charlatans who offer nonsense commercial genetic analysis.
2/n

And also to educate publics for whom the complexities of genetics is incomprehensible or misunderstood.
3/n

With regards to the identification of genetic markers that associate with educational attainment, it is important to recognise that we do not know what almost all of these variants do, nor where these genes are expressed.
4/n

Selection based on these criteria is folly until any of them are better understood.

5/n

Maybe now is indeed the best time for us to be talking in public about this, because any plausible eugenics is years away. Bear in mind that we do not understand how eye colour genetics works.
6/n

We also have to remember that selecting for a trait, however complex, is also selecting against another trait.
7/n

Here's a thing, which in some ways is personal against @toadmeister, but is a more general point.
8/n

There are 1000s of geneticists, psychologists and educationalists who are eloquent and knowledgeable. I see you have authorship on some academic papers now. But I can't work out why you are a better person to talk to than some of your co-authors or
9/n

the many other people whose opinions are based on years of research, and also aren't tainted by the voluntary and repeated expression of 'ill-judged' remarks.
10/n

Instead it seems indicative that a media interest, or a perceived entitlement to hear your views in public discourse is representative of a rejection of expertise over media celebrity or controversy. As such, as we are prone, we risk cheapening the discourse.
11/n

I speak every day to geneticists and other scientists who disagree about the complexities of this field, and my role in public is to expose these conversations to a wider public
12/n

I remain unconvinced that your voice is a useful or valid addition. Again, I may be wrong about this, but I would rather help foment a society where true expertise is valued, and the complexities of science are celebrated.
13/n

I am happy to continue this conversation, which though not complimentary, is not abusive. You know how to get in touch.
14/n

And again, I appreciate your attempts to engage.
With that, I am returning to book writing purdah (on human genetics and evolution, no less), and a holiday, and I wish you a good day.
Adam