IJE Advance Access originally published online on August 19, 2004
International Journal of Epidemiology 2004 33(5):945-946; doi:10.1093/ije/dyh277
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
IJE vol.33 no.5 © International Epidemiological Association 2004; all rights reserved.
Review |
A self-fulfilling prophecy: are we underestimating the role of the environment in gene–environment interaction research?
Imperial College London and University of Torino
Correspondence: Prof. P Vineis, Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, Imperial College London, St Mary's Campus, Norfolk Place London W2 1PG, UK. E-mail: p.vineis@imperial.ac.uk
| The first 10% of the full text of this article appears below. |
Serious mistakes have been made in the past by underestimating the effects of environment and overestimating the effects of genes.1–3 A first seminal 1972 paper by Lewontin1 drew the attention of researchers on the mistakes of partitioning nature and nurture. More recently, Kittles and Weiss, considering the definition of ‘race’, showed the lack of an obvious correspondence between genotypes and phenotypes.3
Many investigations on gene–environment interactions (GEI) are under way in different parts of the world, a subject that also appears as one of the leading items in grant calls from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) or the European Union (EU). Some on-going studies are extremely large (e.g. European Prospective Study into Cancer and Nutrition [EPIC], UK Biobank). All of them employ similar methods for genotyping, while exposure
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  C. P. Wild Environmental exposure measurement in cancer epidemiology Mutagenesis, March 1, 2009; 24(2): 117 - 125. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. Lorenzo Bermejo and K. Hemminki Gene-environment studies: any advantage over environmental studies? Carcinogenesis, July 1, 2007; 28(7): 1526 - 1532. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A Blair Occupational exposures and non-Hodgkin lymphoma: where do we stand? Occup. Environ. Med., January 1, 2006; 63(1): 1 - 3. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 C. P. Wild Complementing the Genome with an "Exposome": The Outstanding Challenge of Environmental Exposure Measurement in Molecular Epidemiology Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., August 1, 2005; 14(8): 1847 - 1850. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. Schwartzbaum, A. Ahlbom, B. Malmer, S. Lonn, A. J. Brookes, H. Doss, W. Debinski, R. Henriksson, and M. Feychting Polymorphisms Associated with Asthma Are Inversely Related to Glioblastoma Multiforme Cancer Res., July 15, 2005; 65(14): 6459 - 6465. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 E. Materia and G. Baglio Health, science, and complexity J Epidemiol Community Health, July 1, 2005; 59(7): 534 - 535. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. V. Diez Roux Persistent Social Patterning of Cardiovascular Risk: Rethinking the Familiar Circulation, June 14, 2005; 111(23): 3020 - 3021. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. J. Khoury, R. Davis, M. Gwinn, M. L. Lindegren, and P. Yoon Do We Need Genomic Research for the Prevention of Common Diseases with Environmental Causes? Am. J. Epidemiol., May 1, 2005; 161(9): 799 - 805. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 D. Forman Commentary: Nitrites, nitrates and nitrosation as causes of brain cancer in children: epidemiological challenges Int. J. Epidemiol., December 1, 2004; 33(6): 1216 - 1218. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. Davey Smith Genetic epidemiology: an 'enlightened narrative'? Int. J. Epidemiol., October 1, 2004; 33(5): 923 - 924. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|