Speed Gene Mumbo Jumbo

[Assasin]

yes there is some frustration because scientists comes up with explanation for it then it disappears. How can you explain the gene in a 400 and 800 runner.

That is simply my question, maybe you can help and then I can understand how the gene works in the Athletics.

[Islandman]

Since me know you are usually a reasonable person I will give it a shot:

Let us forget genes for a minute.

- Elite sprinters have been shown to overwhelmingly have a certain musculature. Matters not where they are from. Please note that overwhelmingly does NOT MEAN every sprinter in the history of the world who has ever won a race.

- Long distance runners have been shown to have a quite different musculature, not as overwhelmingly but it is also dominant. Again, it matters not where they are from.

Before I continue on to middle distance runners, first tell me if what I have stated makes any kind of sense to you, or if you think it is nonsense and the data is probably invalid.

[Assasin]

First let me say I am tired of scientist try to make the science to fit the trend and in a lot of cases they are proven wrong. I go back to when they had some theory why white athlete make better distance runner and blacks make better sprinters. It was proven to be wrong. They came up with it for boxing why blacks were better boxer and it was wrong.

I will not buy into this theory without more than research from a few scientist who maybe predetermined what they wanted as the outcome.

yes but is it down to gene or practice, diet, environment and other factors?

[Islandman]

But I haven't even stated a theory yet! I have merely stated what data gathered by testing has shown.

This is exactly why I paused. If you believe the data is wrong and elite sprinters do not overwhelmingly have a fast twitch musculature then there is no point in going into genetics and the rest.

[Assasin]

No I am laying my skepticism on the table. your data can only re-enforce it or change it. I wouldn't mind you going into it but it is up to you.

I almost walked out of Anthropology class back in College but I have grown to appreciate it.

[Don1]

are you daft???? i've REPEATEDLY said there's no "fast twitch gene" that's been found. it''s a muscle type

Sass I have neither the time nor the patience for remedial kinesiology... unless yuh agguh pay mi

[Sir X]

Island

Boss man my use of fast twitch is in the mix (context ) of Jamaican culture , meaning,african,chiney,syrian,cuban, european etc etc ,how can we attribute our pace to any one gene when we are a mixture of nations, thats what makes us Jamaicans!

You zone in on a gene to justify pace in Jamaica cultural breeding context ? and then some quack gets up and justify it because slaves were bred that way, while true our history didnt stop at breeding post slavery, many nationals came and added to that ,mix, many migrants left to decrease that mix.Bolt himself is a mix himself his father is brown , and his mother is dark and I wouldnt be surprised if her mother was brown.

We have in our families (jamiacans) every hue due to a mix of nationalities,I myself can trace Jewish,Indian, African and Chinese , which gene would I give credit to if I were BOLT ! and the Hue in my family range from caucasian, chinese,Indian to african.

[Don1]

But I haven't even stated a theory yet! I have merely stated what data gathered by testing has shown.

This is exactly why I paused. If you believe the data is wrong and elite sprinters do not overwhelmingly have a fast twitch musculature then there is no point in going into genetics and the rest.

LOL... dis is rich

[Islandman]

The data can only re-enforce or change your opinion if you accept that the data is valid, nuh true?

If I say that data shows that people who smoke have a higher incidence of lung cancer than those who do not smoke, you either accept the data or you do not.

Now, I still have not shown any real evidence that smoking CAUSES lung cancer, just a correlation. However the data is a starting point to investigate from. That is how science works...observation...experimentation....theory... .peer review...etc.

Anyway mek we leave it here, this topic has run its course for a while.

[Assasin]

Let me see the data and judge for myself. I can only tell you my position on the onset. If you have an open mind then you shouldn't have a problem with the position I currently have.

On the other hand I hope this data will be relevant in 5 years time.

[Don1]

You see , I have now realized that when Assasin makes a post like that and X asks about "fast twitch gene vs ******/chiney gene" it confirms to me that they have not even made the slightest attempt to understand the topic.

You cannot hope to explain the Theorem of Pythagoras to someone who refuses to grasp the basic properties of a triangle. The only outcome will be frustration.

yes...the subject can be very confusing....especially when it's such an emotional one for Jamaicans...on cultural & racial grounds

One has to take emotion out of the equation and evaluate the relevant data in order to ovastan

Few are willing to do this but continue with inflexible & comfortable positions ....good for flag waving

I was a victim of that approach...until a project forced me to examine the science. and come to a general understanding of what has actually been established

[Karl]

We cannot stand it Because it feels better when you can say my success had nothing to do with what I was born with, it is all about what I have done.

Of course we all know that natural talent alone gets most of us nowhere. It has to have an environment to thrive in. In fact I have no problem with the viewpoint that genes gives an advantage but the deficit can be overcome with focus, hard work and the numbers you throw at the problem.

For example, China has 1.3 billion people so even if talent in any area is rare there , one in a million for them is 1300 people while for say Jamaica it is not even 3 people. I would think that if they focus on just about any area of life with enough intensity they should be able to find more elite performers than we can.

But those who want to claim that "anybody can achieve anything" with enough hard work, and natural talent does not play any part, well....keep your heads in the sand but the science says otherwise.

You hit the nail on the head. There is a built in human trait of me, myself and I...no one but me responsible for my successes. ...so how the hell you wish to infer that others born long before me helped?

...now failures, that is a different kettle of fish!!!