Lasse Folkersen
@folkersen.com
CSO Nucleus Genomics
Genetics, polygenic risk scores. Previously at impute.me and Genome Center Denmark
Genetics, polygenic risk scores. Previously at impute.me and Genome Center Denmark
Life will find a way!
September 22, 2025 at 5:05 AM
Life will find a way!
Sex, age, cholesterol, blood pressure pretty good too. But they are all independent and can be used together, so there is that.
June 29, 2025 at 6:41 AM
Sex, age, cholesterol, blood pressure pretty good too. But they are all independent and can be used together, so there is that.
Probably because he or she followed me, and I just pressed follow back, idk. Have no idea who it is.
Look, I will be very happy to debate ethics with you, but I think you come off as slightly threatening here. What gives?
Look, I will be very happy to debate ethics with you, but I think you come off as slightly threatening here. What gives?
June 10, 2025 at 6:14 AM
Probably because he or she followed me, and I just pressed follow back, idk. Have no idea who it is.
Look, I will be very happy to debate ethics with you, but I think you come off as slightly threatening here. What gives?
Look, I will be very happy to debate ethics with you, but I think you come off as slightly threatening here. What gives?
Following someone on bsky (or elsewhere) does not imply a recommendation of their opinion, in my book.
June 10, 2025 at 3:36 AM
Following someone on bsky (or elsewhere) does not imply a recommendation of their opinion, in my book.
Yes, I understand that you think the spread of predictions should be more tight. That's why I ask what threshold you'd consider as ok? The reason I ask, is of course that some of the PRS are actually stronger predictors than PGT-M, which I assume you find to be ok.
June 8, 2025 at 11:51 AM
Yes, I understand that you think the spread of predictions should be more tight. That's why I ask what threshold you'd consider as ok? The reason I ask, is of course that some of the PRS are actually stronger predictors than PGT-M, which I assume you find to be ok.
That's fine! Thanks for discussing.
June 8, 2025 at 7:26 AM
That's fine! Thanks for discussing.
But it's not nothing either, and because of that I think it's a real problem that otherwise well-intended reporting guidelines inadvertently can lift it up to a status of strong but forbidden.
June 8, 2025 at 7:00 AM
But it's not nothing either, and because of that I think it's a real problem that otherwise well-intended reporting guidelines inadvertently can lift it up to a status of strong but forbidden.
These are typical values btw, breast cancer PRS are very strong and it seems odd to me to not use that, if monogenic PGT-M is accepted as ok. IQ prediction strength is weak at best, few points at the max.
June 8, 2025 at 7:00 AM
These are typical values btw, breast cancer PRS are very strong and it seems odd to me to not use that, if monogenic PGT-M is accepted as ok. IQ prediction strength is weak at best, few points at the max.
My view then, is to take openness of information to it's completion and instead emphasise accurate communication. Using absolute scales helps, e.g. comparing between +1 IQ and -30%points breast cancer risk frames the choices in a way that reflects the relative differences in prediction strength.
June 8, 2025 at 7:00 AM
My view then, is to take openness of information to it's completion and instead emphasise accurate communication. Using absolute scales helps, e.g. comparing between +1 IQ and -30%points breast cancer risk frames the choices in a way that reflects the relative differences in prediction strength.
Yes, very difficult to draw a firm line, agreed, exactly. "PRS vs monogenic" won't work, because some PRS are stronger. Similarly "traits vs diseases" also can run into problems because extremes of traits often become diseases (e.g. dwarfism/height, mental-retardation/IQ).
June 8, 2025 at 7:00 AM
Yes, very difficult to draw a firm line, agreed, exactly. "PRS vs monogenic" won't work, because some PRS are stronger. Similarly "traits vs diseases" also can run into problems because extremes of traits often become diseases (e.g. dwarfism/height, mental-retardation/IQ).
How do they work then?
June 8, 2025 at 12:28 AM
How do they work then?
So what are your exact limits of allowance then? Can people use stronger PRS like those for breast cancer and diabetes? (R^2 =20-30%) Or is that also strictly for adult testing in your view?
June 8, 2025 at 12:27 AM
So what are your exact limits of allowance then? Can people use stronger PRS like those for breast cancer and diabetes? (R^2 =20-30%) Or is that also strictly for adult testing in your view?
So what's your preferred predictive value threshold instead? 10% variability explained? 30%? Some PRS exceed that level, and I'm trying to understand which parts of them you don't like.
June 8, 2025 at 12:22 AM
So what's your preferred predictive value threshold instead? 10% variability explained? 30%? Some PRS exceed that level, and I'm trying to understand which parts of them you don't like.
You can, actually, the technology has come a long way.
June 8, 2025 at 12:11 AM
You can, actually, the technology has come a long way.
I see. Guess I have to relearn some basic biology here 😄 But it makes total sense in the age of genetics! Which I guess takes us back to your thought experiment on "how much" they could make a jackal from a wolf.
April 12, 2025 at 9:10 AM
I see. Guess I have to relearn some basic biology here 😄 But it makes total sense in the age of genetics! Which I guess takes us back to your thought experiment on "how much" they could make a jackal from a wolf.
Interesting. Can they fertile offspring or is that criteria not really used anymore?
April 12, 2025 at 8:53 AM
Interesting. Can they fertile offspring or is that criteria not really used anymore?
That's an interesting thought experiment! Really defines what "functional" mean. How close do you they could come?
April 12, 2025 at 8:23 AM
That's an interesting thought experiment! Really defines what "functional" mean. How close do you they could come?
They did contribute to a lot of scientific publications to be fair. Those are a service, no?
March 27, 2025 at 11:48 AM
They did contribute to a lot of scientific publications to be fair. Those are a service, no?