It should be noted that the reason why only 10 embryos are the selection sample is because the women who do IVF tend to be older and have few eggs. Among women around age 20, egg extractions that retrieve 100 embryos are possible.
In all of human history, it has happened exactly zero (0) times that an IVF cycle ("egg extraction") has resulted in 100 embryos, no matter the age of the woman. No even close.
Tech is a pipe dream. All this means is that the Jews will clone Infinity Pajeet-Haitians to kill us all. The shiny tech toys will never be allowed in the hands of the goyim.
I find the discussion interesting, but without knowing just what a difference a gain of 6 points makes, have a hard time coming to conclusion of value. I assume from discussion the 6 points hypothesized is a shift of the Bell curve to the right of 6 points. So my question is, for a previous hypothesized potential intellect of say dead average (100), is a move to 106 the same benefit as say a move from 115 lot 121? Or 130 to 136? The assumption of an interval scale for IQ—rather than rank order—comes into play. Or perhaps I’m overthinking this…
Regression to the mean means that a 130 IQ couple will not have children with 130 IQ on avg, and also means that selecting for intelligence becomes harder as it gets higher. So perhaps they will have kids of avg 120 IQ, and selecting the best of 10 embryos may net them +3-4 IQ.
However, that’s selecting just the best 10 embryos. If you could check 10,000 embryos you could produce a 140 IQ baby from a 100 IQ couple, or a 150 IQ baby from a 130 IQ couple. Also eventually we will get better at identifying genes that matter for intelligence and will be able to select better.
It could also be in the inverse it could be 135 I mean it's usually based on the bell curve of your genetic variation and your wife's genetic variation if I'm not butchering it.
The apple doesn't fall 10 points below the tree though it's usually 5 points.
> It could also be in the inverse it could be 135 I mean it's usually based on the bell curve of your genetic variation and your wife's genetic variation if I'm not butchering it.
Possible if you were suppressed by shitty environment factors and gave your children the perfect upbringing.
> The apple doesn't fall 10 points below the tree though it's usually 5 points.
Honestly there was no math behind that number but I decided to dig into it a bit.
Let's assume IQ is 50% heritable, and 50% is everything else. If you and your wife have +2 SD IQ and your children have a +1 SD environment, their IQ would be 122. If you lean towards IQ being 80% heritable it'd be 127.
Unfortunately most of childhood is pretty random, parenting and SES have been shown to have fairly low impact. So try as you might your kids will probably have an average childhood, giving them an avg 115 IQ (124 if you think its 80% heritable). Even children in the same family have a spread of about 10 IQ which goes to show how much variance is involved in unpredictable environmental factors.
I think it's not fair to put a number on that since there's much we don't know, and it depends on how optimistic you are about being able to influence your children's development. Even if it's low impact the parental factor still matters and maximizing it is the most anyone can do for their children anyway.
You’ve not answered the importance of selection for non-gifted persons, which was the essence of my inquiry. Also, selection will not increase IQ forever. At some point the reaction range of the combination of variables selected for will be reached.
On an individual level I think it's more useful to go from average to gifted than gifted to more gifted. For example, being able to do your taxes properly might take around 100 IQ; understanding how much you're paying over the course of a car loan or mortgage might take 105 IQ. Understanding government policies might take 110-115 IQ.
Past a certain point (120?) you are for all respects able to fully understand and discuss any practical matter you care about; sure there are smarter people who can process it quicker or to a higher level, but you can't do your taxes better than perfect.
It should be noted that the reason why only 10 embryos are the selection sample is because the women who do IVF tend to be older and have few eggs. Among women around age 20, egg extractions that retrieve 100 embryos are possible.
In all of human history, it has happened exactly zero (0) times that an IVF cycle ("egg extraction") has resulted in 100 embryos, no matter the age of the woman. No even close.
Tech is a pipe dream. All this means is that the Jews will clone Infinity Pajeet-Haitians to kill us all. The shiny tech toys will never be allowed in the hands of the goyim.
Great bro is on racism in 2025
Have been since 2012, why are you slow?
I find the discussion interesting, but without knowing just what a difference a gain of 6 points makes, have a hard time coming to conclusion of value. I assume from discussion the 6 points hypothesized is a shift of the Bell curve to the right of 6 points. So my question is, for a previous hypothesized potential intellect of say dead average (100), is a move to 106 the same benefit as say a move from 115 lot 121? Or 130 to 136? The assumption of an interval scale for IQ—rather than rank order—comes into play. Or perhaps I’m overthinking this…
Regression to the mean means that a 130 IQ couple will not have children with 130 IQ on avg, and also means that selecting for intelligence becomes harder as it gets higher. So perhaps they will have kids of avg 120 IQ, and selecting the best of 10 embryos may net them +3-4 IQ.
However, that’s selecting just the best 10 embryos. If you could check 10,000 embryos you could produce a 140 IQ baby from a 100 IQ couple, or a 150 IQ baby from a 130 IQ couple. Also eventually we will get better at identifying genes that matter for intelligence and will be able to select better.
It could also be in the inverse it could be 135 I mean it's usually based on the bell curve of your genetic variation and your wife's genetic variation if I'm not butchering it.
The apple doesn't fall 10 points below the tree though it's usually 5 points.
> It could also be in the inverse it could be 135 I mean it's usually based on the bell curve of your genetic variation and your wife's genetic variation if I'm not butchering it.
Possible if you were suppressed by shitty environment factors and gave your children the perfect upbringing.
> The apple doesn't fall 10 points below the tree though it's usually 5 points.
Honestly there was no math behind that number but I decided to dig into it a bit.
Let's assume IQ is 50% heritable, and 50% is everything else. If you and your wife have +2 SD IQ and your children have a +1 SD environment, their IQ would be 122. If you lean towards IQ being 80% heritable it'd be 127.
Unfortunately most of childhood is pretty random, parenting and SES have been shown to have fairly low impact. So try as you might your kids will probably have an average childhood, giving them an avg 115 IQ (124 if you think its 80% heritable). Even children in the same family have a spread of about 10 IQ which goes to show how much variance is involved in unpredictable environmental factors.
I think it's not fair to put a number on that since there's much we don't know, and it depends on how optimistic you are about being able to influence your children's development. Even if it's low impact the parental factor still matters and maximizing it is the most anyone can do for their children anyway.
You’ve not answered the importance of selection for non-gifted persons, which was the essence of my inquiry. Also, selection will not increase IQ forever. At some point the reaction range of the combination of variables selected for will be reached.
I see we think alike. Thanks for sharing with me.
That's a more nuanced question for sure.
On an individual level I think it's more useful to go from average to gifted than gifted to more gifted. For example, being able to do your taxes properly might take around 100 IQ; understanding how much you're paying over the course of a car loan or mortgage might take 105 IQ. Understanding government policies might take 110-115 IQ.
Past a certain point (120?) you are for all respects able to fully understand and discuss any practical matter you care about; sure there are smarter people who can process it quicker or to a higher level, but you can't do your taxes better than perfect.
A certain +6 looks better when there is a chance of -10.
But only very few people care enough about IQ to be willing to go through embryo selection. I wouldn't.
You are an excellent and deserving follow.
Congratulations on the orange mark!
curious about the high extraversion number, I had heard that introverts are more intelligent.
https://themindsjournal.com/are-introverts-intelligent/