Poverty supresses children's genetic potential, study says

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Researchers at the University of Texas claim that poverty may affect how children achieve their genetic potential. Using 750 sets of twins as subjects, the team of psychologists led by assistant professor Elliot Tucker-Drob found that 50 percent of the progress wealthier children show on mental ability tests can be attributed to genetics. Children from poor families, however, showed almost no progress attributable to genetics.

Don't get too carried away with the conclusions this might suggest. Based on this study, rich kids are not genetically superior to children of poverty. They're simply provided with more opportunities to fulfill their potential.

Of course, this conclusion holds some interesting implications for the field of childhood development. From the University of Texas announcement about the findings:

These findings go to the heart of the age-old debate about whether "nature" or "nurture" is more important to a child's development. They suggest the two work together and that the right environment can help children begin to reach their genetic potentials at a much earlier age than previously thought.

As the nation pulls out of the greatest economic disaster since the Great Depression, such a breakthrough could serve to shift attention toward taking better care of America's youth.

One out of every five children in the U.S. lives in poverty. That's a lot of lost potential.

http://www.salon.com/news/psychology/index.html?story=%2Fnews%2Ffeature%2F2011%2F01%2F10%2Fchild_health_poverty_genetics

[mawilson 2,133]

I don't get it.

[Danno 1,228]

I don't get it.

I don't get it either.

People in Poverty..... a family of 4 get about $400 permonth for food alone, (not including free lunch and breakfast at school, WIC etc) if they contributed absolutely nothing to their own food budget .... they are eating plenty.... and it shows.

[Ban Hammer 12,842]

I don't get it.

it's probably a reason to tax the rich more.

[Danno 1,228]

PLaying along with this "Science" let me ask: Would the offspring of these children in poverty be effected by this loss of genetic potential?

Or would the next generation, if well fed be just as whole as had the parent(raised in poverty) never suffered nutritionally?

[james&olya 1,121]

PLaying along with this "Science" let me ask: Would the offspring of these children in poverty be effected by this loss of genetic potential?

Or would the next generation, if well fed be just as whole as had the parent(raised in poverty) never suffered nutritionally?

There is an awful lot more going on here than just nutritional issues, though that is involved. Think of it as malnutrition of the mind and soul.

[웃 910]

a family of 4 get about $400 permonth for food alone

WOW!! $25/week for groceries per head.

I would be extremely depressed and possibly suicidal if I had to survive on $25 a week to buy food.

I guess I could be a dollar millionaire and eat dinner off the dollar menus at a different fast food joint each night. But even going that route, I'd still spend $5 to $6 a "dinner" and would run out of money in 4 to 5 nights, and that is not including breakfast, lunch, beverages, or midnight snacks!

[james&olya 1,121]

WOW!! $25/week for groceries per head.

I would be extremely depressed and possibly suicidal if I had to survive on $25 a week to buy food.

I guess I could be a dollar millionaire and eat dinner off the dollar menus at a different fast food joint each night. But even going that route, I'd still spend $5 to $6 a "dinner" and would run out of money in 4 to 5 nights, and that is not including breakfast, lunch, beverages, or midnight snacks!

It is unfortunate that more is not being done to teach good nutrition and how that $25 can actually be more than adequate if you know how to prepare real food.

[slim 1,514]

It is unfortunate there's reproduction among those in poverty.

Logically speaking, if you can't afford offspring, you shouldn't reproduce.

[웃 910]

It is unfortunate that more is not being done to teach good nutrition and how that $25 can actually be more than adequate if you know how to prepare real food.

I guess I was raised in a different generation but I don't see how $3.57 per day ($25/week) could ever be 'more than adequate'....

Edited January 11, 2011 by Lord Infamous

[^_^ 5,021]

It is unfortunate there's reproduction among those in poverty.

Logically speaking, if you can't afford offspring, you shouldn't reproduce.

There is no constitutional right to procreate so I don't see why we can't just make people file Affidavits of Support before procreating.

Edited January 11, 2011 by \

[slim 1,514]

There is no constitutional right to procreate so I don't see why we can't just make people file Affidavits of Support before procreating.

We should license it while we're at it!

[^_^ 5,021]

We should license it while we're at it!

And no cosponsors allowed.

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

I don't get it.

His childhood maybe?

[Peikko 1,575]

There is no constitutional right to procreate so I don't see why we can't just make people file Affidavits of Support before procreating.

Poor people should be encouraged to buy machine guns instead of procreating.

Perhaps poor people can be given a machine gun for every baby they don't have?