Do We Need to Think Differently About Genetics?

According to conventional wisdom, genetics accounts for only approximately 15% to 25% of disease, with the rest being due to lifestyle, diet, and environment. However, taking only the direct gene-to-disease approach is hugely, and unnecessarily, limiting. If we instead look at genetics from the perspective of metabolism, nutrient needs, and environmental resilience, a very different picture emerges. A person with multiple polymorphisms in methylene tetrahydrofolate reductase (MTHFR) will almost always have an elevated blood homocysteine and clearly increased risk of heart disease. However, when a person has polymorphisms leading to 1 or more of the liver CYP detoxification enzymes underfunctioning, they are more susceptible to the damaging effects of multiple environmental toxins. This does not lead to a simple connection to a specific disease, but rather leads to increased risk of multiple diseases if the person is also exposed to the toxins that should have been neutralized by the underfunctioning enzymes. The same logic applies to mild-to-moderate nutritional deficiencies, which may show up only as a problem in the context of certain genetic polymorphisms. Taking this perspective opens a much broader and deeper way of thinking about genetics, biochemical individuality, and strategies for preventing and even reversing disease.