23andMe’s Study Draws Links between Covid-19 and Our Genetics

Last spring as Covid-19 began making its way through the population 23andMe began a study to answer the question “who’s likely to get sick, or to get very sick?”

A common problem with studies like this is finding enough participants, with enough diversity for the results to be accurate. The study collected data from more than a million participants, with three percent of participants identifying as black, and 11% of participants identifying as Latino. These numbers are still lower than the diversity represented in the U.S but are higher than the diversity in most studies of this type.

People were asked about their age, socioeconomic status, ethnicity, and specific questions about Covid-19, such as were they diagnosed with Covid-19, were they hospitalized, and how they assessed their breathing. Of the 1.05 million respondents, 15,000 reported being diagnosed with Covid, with 1,1000 hospitalized.

The study found a strong connection between blood type and rather or not someone would test positive for Covid-19. People with the O blood type were less likely to test positive for the virus.

Related: How To Detoxify and Heal From Vaccinations – For Adults and Children

One especially strong link popped out: the gene that determines a person’s blood type. The analysis showed that the ABO gene strongly linked to the possibility that someone would test negative for Covid-19. A person’s blood type is determined by variations in a single gene. The team found that the O blood type was less likely to test positive for the infection than expected—suggesting, though not necessarily proving, that the blood type could be more protective against the disease.

23andMe’s Huge Covid-19 Study Draws Links Between the Virus and Our Genetics



An Examination of Genome-Wide Association Studies Finds a European Bias

If you’re a person of European ancestry from the United States, United Kingdom, or Iceland, congratulations! A recent study review published in Communications Biology examined 3,369 genome-wide association studies (GWAS) conducted from 2005 to 2018 and found that more than 80 percent of the people studied had a European background, and 72 percent of discoveries were made from studies examining individuals from those three countries. Seventy-six percent of the world’s 7 billion people live in Asia and Africa, populations underexamined in genome studies. This lack of diversity limits the potential for discoveries and decreases the effectiveness of genetically targeted treatments. As the authors of this review conclude,

A central finding was that our results once again emphasized the potential for a cycle of disadvantage for underrepresented communities and despite continued efforts, infusing diversity into genomics remains challenging.”

So what are genome-wide association studies?

Where the Data Comes From

Why do genome studies lack diversity? This is due in large part to where the data is coming from. Many of these genome-wide studies rely on genetic material obtained from testing sites like 23andme. Those results are heavily skewed. Less than three years ago, researchers from Stanford estimated as many as 90 percent of the research into the genetics of disease was based on people of European descent. Services like this also explain why Iceland, a country with less than 350,000 people, figures prominently into genetic research. The Icelandic company, deCODE Genetics, has been cataloging genetic information for more than 20 years, and nearly a third of the population has had at least part of their genome sequenced.

Other Influences

Funding also plays a role in genome study results. Of the more than 3,000 studies examined in this review, 85 percent of the funding acknowledgments referenced grants and other agencies in the U.S. Another 14 percent are based in the United Kingdom. This means the rest of the world is responsible for funding one percent of available genome-wide studies. Both the U.S. and the U.K. are predominantly composed of people with European ancestry (61 and 87 percent, respectively). 

Another explanation for the overrepresentation of European ancestry in genome-wide studies is the people releasing them. Of the ten most connected and influential authors of genome studies, 9 are based in Europe. Three work for deCODE genetics in Iceland. Another three work for Erasmus Medical Center in the Netherlands, though that number would have been 4 prior to 2016. The only non-European author (based at Harvard University in the U.S.) also used to work at Erasmus. The work of these European men (and woman) is highly influential. Their articles and studies have been cumulatively cited over 200,000 times, and all of these scientists have strong European ties.

Echo Chambers

Genome-wide association studies are still a relatively new area of study (the first successful study was in 2002). These studies use a majority of data from those with European ancestry, receive funds from agencies in countries with a majority of European ancestry, and are authored by white, mostly European scientists. It creates an echo chamber. That can limit, and in some cases, even hinder discovery.

The Oxford researchers responsible for this study call for more diversity, both ethnically and geographically.

GWAS that utilize data from diverse populations will provide more accurately targeted therapeutic treatments to more of the world’s population, extend insights into the architecture of traits and uncover rare variants with significant effect sizes, which replicate across ancestries.”

Sources:


Is Diabetes Caused by Sugar or Bad Genetics?

To put it simplistically, sugar feeds the worst of our gut flora, including parasites, non-beneficial bacteria, and Candida. This opens the doors to all sorts of disease. People whose calorie intake is 25% sugar or more are three times more likely to die of heart disease. Fructose, one type of sugar we’ve recently started consuming in much larger quantities, even has the power to alter our genes and increase the likelihood of developing Alzheimer’s, ADHD, or other brain issues, though this author suspects that all food has the power to alter our genes one way or another, hence the importance of a healthy diet.

We tell kids that too much sugar isn’t good for them. We tell them this all of the time, and we heard it all the time, but that message often dies off once we reach adulthood. The rotten teeth, mood swings, and hyperactivity that we warn the little ones about are problems many adults deal with due to consuming too much sugar! Unless you’re overweight or developing diabetes, conventional medicine is content to pay lip service to the dangers of sugar.

Why Quality Matters

It’s difficult to find definitive information regarding sugar. Arguments over how bad sugar really is tend to end up with someone claiming, “Even fruit has sugar,” followed by “Everything must have sugar to survive,” followed by a general throwing up of the hands and a return to previous eating habits out of confusion and frustration.

Or was it just the justification we wanted?

If I’m going to eat sugar anyway, why not eat what I want?

But that’s a reductive and damaging argument that we know on some level is wrong. We ask children to eat an apple instead of drinking a soda. If health is the objective, it’s time we adults heed the same advice.

Fruit contains fructose, yes. But it also contains antioxidants,  vitamins, and the fiber needed to slow down the actual absorption of the fructose. Incidentally, whole raw foods generally have the nutrition that our beneficial flora prefer. Synthetic or refined forms of fructose don’t have any of these benefits, or any health benefits, as it’s derived from corn starch or sucrose (table sugar, basically) and devoid of any actual nutrients. Comparing the synthetic or refined fructose to the sugar that’s in an apple is like handing someone that apple and a piece of paper and claiming they’re the same thing since they both come from trees. Refined, processed sugar isn’t good for you, and not all sugars are equal.

Sugar Is All Around You

So, it seems easy to move forward here. No sugar in the morning cup of tea, lay off the desserts, and stop using… vegetable broth? Say no to granola?

Sugar is not just an after meal treat. Once you decide to limit your sugar intake, you will find that most of the food people regularly consume, processed foods, are products containing sugar to deliberately mask the taste of nutrient-void, bland, preservative-laden ingredients. People have become accustomed to sugar being slipped into everything. We know sugar is incredibly addictive.

The FDA claims to be trying to get labels changed in an effort to better indicate hidden sweeteners, but there are only two options right now. Learn your sugars (from glucose to stevia to xylitol to corn syrup), read labels, and cook more of your own food at home from scratch.

But…But, It’s Genetic!

While it’s absolutely true that some people are predisposed to certain conditions through their genes, science is learning that what you eat actually changes your genes. Fructose, according to a recently released UCLA study, is the difference between knowing your mother has diabetes and actually developing diabetes yourself. The majority of genes that can be altered by the consumption of too much fructose are associated with inflammation, cell communication, and metabolism regulation. It’s no surprise, then, that possible conditions from consuming enough fructose to alter the brain’s genes include Alzheimer’s, ADHD, cardiovascular disease, Parkinson’s, and depression, to name a few.

Nature has a way of balancing things though; the right foods can play a role in rebuilding you and making you stronger. People who eat the best diets deserve the best DNA, right? Be sure to check out Healthy Sugar Alternatives & More to get to know your sweeteners.

Related Reading:
Sources: