This article gives its readers insight on information about how genes can affect a person’s overall health, including both physical and mental health. However they also claim that changes to lifestyle can help counteract a person's genetic predisposition to certain illness. Evidence used to prove this claim includes, a set a identical twins one who developed Alzheimer’s and one who didn't, they justify this by stating that the twin who developed Alzheimer's lead an unhealthy lifestyle compare to his/her brother. The Article then goes on to state that performing genetic testing to look for future illness come with positive and negative results. It ends with stating that although genetics play a large role in human health, leading a healthy lifestyle can decrease the likelihood of illness.
Initially I found this article interesting because it was informative and provided some scientific evidence. However I couldn't help but notice that some of the scientists behind the evidence supporting
the claims in the article work for a company that provides genetic testing. The article also uses names of famous celebrities such as Kim Kardashian and Chris Hemsworth to help them with their credibility. I think that the information in this article is valuable however more research is needed in order to form an educated opinion on the topic.
The article's exploration of the relationship between genetics and lifestyle in influencing human health is indeed a compelling topic. The notion that lifestyle choices can counteract genetic predispositions provides a hopeful message about the control we have over our health outcomes.
ReplyDeleteThe example of the identical twins, with one developing Alzheimer's while the other does not, serves as a poignant illustration of how lifestyle factors can profoundly influence health, even in the context of identical genetic makeup. This underscores the importance of considering both our genetic blueprint and our lifestyle choices when thinking about our health.
However, your point about the potential conflict of interest is well-taken. The involvement of scientists who are affiliated with a genetic testing company could raise questions about the objectivity of the evidence presented. It's crucial for readers to be aware of these potential biases to critically assess the information.
Moreover, leveraging celebrity endorsements like those of Kim Kardashian and Chris Hemsworth, while attention-grabbing, may not necessarily contribute to the scientific credibility of the information. It's essential to differentiate between popularity and scientific validity.
While the article sheds light on an important aspect of health science, your call for further research is apt. It highlights the need for ongoing inquiry and independent validation to fully understand the complexities of genetics and lifestyle in human health. As we navigate this intricate interplay, a critical approach to the information we consume is indispensable.