(Wired) Genetic tests of athlethic prowess- for babies ((Maybe not a good idea?))

[Guest guest]

Does anyone else also think this might not be the best of ideas? A strong counterpoint is one cross country runner I know that is simply not made for cross country. His legs are short, his strength is more in the upper body than most runners, and his muscles are not endurance muscles, but he does have one attribute that is key: His spirit is very competitive, and he can take pain in large amounts.

http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/12/a-gene-test-of.html

Genetic Tests of Athletic Prowess — For BabiesA new genetic test offers to predict the

sports at which a baby will someday excel. But even if the science were

sound — it's not — this might not be a good idea. The $150 test, offered by Colorado-based Atlas Sports Genetics,

looks at ACTN3, a gene that codes for fast-twitch muscle fiber. People

with lots of fast-twitching muscle are ostensibly suited for " burst "

sports like football or sprinting. Those with slow-twitch muscles ought

to be better at endurance sports. " Finding any great Olympic athlete normally takes years to

determine, " proclaims the company's website. " What if we knew a part of

the answer when we were born? " But sporting achievement isn't that simple. Theodore Friedmann, a University of California-San Diego gene therapist, told the New York Times that the test was " an opportunity to sell new versions of snake oil. "

Hundreds of genes have been implicated in athletic success. ACTN3 is

just one of these. (Sure, Jamaicans have disproportionately high levels of ACTN3 — but if that explains their Olympic dominance in 2008, what about their poor showing in 2004?)

These genes have yet to be connected with those other, equally

important predictors of success, which go by the unscientific names of

" heart " and " smarts. " A perfect example is Boston Red Sox second

baseman Pedroia: slow, small, weak and fabulously successful. " This kid can't run. He's not very strong. He's 5'4 " , or whatever he

is on a good day. He doesn't have much fast twitch. He's just a

ballplayer, " said his college baseball coach, Pat , in a Boston Globe story on Pedroia's winning the American League's Most Valuable Player Award.

But even if ACTN3 testing was completely accurate, able to predict

athletic success before a baby had graduated from bottle-feeding to

Gatorade, would it be desirable?

Becoming a professional athlete is only a little more realistic than

becoming a rock star. Which isn't to say people shouldn't strive — but

reaching

the pinnacle is less important than the process itself.

The benefits of childhood sports take many forms: how to be a good

teammate. Learning to perform under pressure. The satisfaction and

self-confidence of overcoming adversity. The value of practice and

self-discipline. Most important of all is simple fun. If a child

doesn't enjoy a

sport, he or she should do something else.

Reading about the Atlas Sports Genetics test reminded me of a

conversation I overheard last year at a local coffee shop. Two new

parents were talking with a friend about what sport their baby boy would

play. Basketball and football were out of the question, dad said: he'd

never be big enough to succeed. The friend suggested tennis, but mom

said that traveling across the country for high-level tournaments was

too expensive.

The parents seemed like nice, thoughtful and genuinely supportive

people. It just hadn't occurred to them that their son might be fine

picking a sport he liked, and playing it for fun.Image: A child holding a bat, with no implications made about parental pressure / box of lettuce

See Also:Bolt Is Freaky Fast, But Nowhere Near Human LimitsJamaican Sprinting Dominance Isn't Genetic | Wired Science from ...

The Marvelous Muscles of the Mud-Loving ToadfishLooking for Love In All the Right Alleles | Wired Science from ...

WiSci 2.0: Keim's Twitter stream and Del.icio.us feed; Wired Science on Facebook.