[drgo]

Is it possible that the pro-schizophrenia genes persist because they offer other (non-neurological) benefits, e.g., lower risk of cancer? Siblings of patients with schizophrenia are less likely to develop cancer, and in several studies these patients had lower risk of developing cancer despite higher prevalence of smoking.

[lokar]

The benefit must be to reproduction. Cancer generally happens after peak reproductive years.

[FollowingTheDao]

There’s no such thing as a “pro schizophrenia genes”. There are only genes that increase the risk of schizophrenia, and this is probably due to environmental variables.

Exchanging a risk for cancer for a risk of schizophrenia is not a win-win situation. You’re just switching one set of risk genes for another.

[01HNNWZ0MV43FF]

> There are only genes that increase the risk of schizophrenia

I think that's what GP was saying?

> You’re just switching one set of risk genes for another.

I think... that's what GP was saying?

[ekaryotic]

>Exchanging a risk for cancer for a risk of schizophrenia is not a win-win situation But it can be though. Consider a population that works with carcinogens like coal. due to capitalist class structures, they cannot leave their occupation, so a gene that would increase their survivability would be a great help.