rich babies have less deminishing nurtures, but their theoretical (unobtainable) maximum IQ is still the same

question: Have these tests taken into account nurture starting from conception? I.E. mothers health? because twin studies are helpful, but without controlling for the mothers health habits there is a pretty important period of development in which nurture can very much affect the resulting baby before IQ tests can be measured.

mothers health effects both twins equally, unles you can prove me otherwise

yes... which means they can be damaged or improved equally.

potentially away

yes, but you can not use mothers health to explain a difference in IQ

as it effects both infants equally

you fail to understand the point

up until they are born, they are nurtured equally.

this may interest you https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4270739/

post being born, ideally they are split up and sent to their adoptive families...

http://www.pnas.org/content/111/38/13790.full and this

correct, which is how you get the two different IQs. but the best for both of them is set during pregnancy.

a friend of mine is studying genetics

if you don't control for the mother, what happens when she does damage to the developing child.

or the environment does

not exactly, as soon as the genetic material is combined the theoretical maximum IQ could be calculated, asuming perfect knowledge

have they accounted for this?

you mean the adoptive mother?

not the genetic one?

no

accounted for the effect of environment on the development of the children while in the womb

i doubt alcohol and paint chips are good for the IQ of a developing fetus

it was the same environment, on the same genetics, before they have had a chance to experience different stimuli, so they are effectivly nurtured equally till birth

grenade they control for the mother

okay

if they are social scientists worth their salt they would control for anything they can afford to control for

that oversight is not lost on people whove dedicated 10+ years of their lives in order to come up with this kind of data

lets see, there was the thingy about "show me the gene"

regardless of wether or not you even know what genes are, you can predict something that functions like genes exist based on reproduction results

hold on, let me finish on my previous point before you pivot

aite sure

Cytos you still failed to see my point. So let me phrase it this way. Take 2 twin pregnancies. One of a higher IQ mother, and one of a Lower IQ mother, now, hypothetically, take these 2 pregnancies and run them through 2 different timelines. One in which both mothers receive the best healthcare throughout the pregnancy, one in which they both drink. If there is a genetic component, then in both of those tests, the higher should, on average, remain higher, and the lower remain lower.

all i asked was, have they attempted to prove that

well not literally as that would involve multi dimentional observation and we are not quitte there yet i am afraid

however, on average if you have 2 similar IQ mothers and one drinks while pregnant the baby will have a lower IQ then the one where the mother does not drink while pregnant, on average

assuming they drink the same amount if you compare 2 sets of 2 mothers with similar IQs

where set A has 100IQ both but one drinks
and set B has a 110IQ both, but one drinks

if you compare these enough times, and they drink the same amount, on average the baby with the 110IQ parent will be on top in both the non drinking IQ comparison, and the only drinking IQ comparison

on average

as fetal alcohol syndrome is pretty well established at this point