Comments on: Scientist Smackdown: Can a Single Gene Really Predict Depression?

By: YouRang

YouRang — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 13:28:37 +0000

It would have been nice if one of the articles quoted reported the supposed rate of incidence of major depression in each group and had reported the frequency of each of the two alleles worldwide. If the incidence of the gene is so low that it may cause SOME depression, then if the subsequent tests chose people at random, then both sides might be correct: THE GENE MAY HAVE A HIGH PROBABILITY OF CAUSING DEPRESSION IN ITS OWNERS: BUT OTHER CAUSES MIGHT ALSO BE IMPORTANT IN THE ONES WITHOUT THE GENE. Also were the people in the more recent phone interviews chosen at random or were they known to have depression or known not to have depression.

By: imanism

imanism — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 07:55:31 +0000

Well said!

Besides, this issue is highly debatable anyway. The second study’s findings are more akin to common sense, really. No one will likely find a single gene responsible for depression, because the issue of emotional instability is not a two dimensional problem.

Seriously, c’mon.

A test of less than 1,000 people, long-term or no, that finds something remarkable like a smoking gun gene….

I mean, that is a little suspect. Is it not?

By: Alex

Alex — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 22:27:27 +0000

Arguing that the large studies using objective measures are less accurate than smaller studies using interviews is a bit disingenuous for a scientist. While the comprehensive interviews may have been conducted in a scientifically rigorous manner, there’s no reason not to expect that an objective inventory correlating depressive episodes, health care, life events, etc. wouldn’t be equally scientific. The 2009 authors could just as easily call interviews a “weak measure,” unless the interviewers were all trained to interpret in the same way, and captured the same measurements across the board.

Isn’t the goal not to cast stones at each other, but to take what’s useful from both studies and discover the truth?