Talk:Överkalix study

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Molecular Biology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Molecular Biology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Molecular BiologyWikipedia:WikiProject Molecular BiologyTemplate:WikiProject Molecular BiologyMolecular Biology
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Genetics task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Medicine Low‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Sweden Low‑importance

	Sweden portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sweden, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sweden-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SwedenWikipedia:WikiProject SwedenTemplate:WikiProject SwedenSweden
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

In this study the differences of food supply are assumed to be random in relationship to genetic differences. Can we really assume that? For instance suppose that there was a reason for that some grandparents were short of food - ADHD - alcoholism, just to give a few of very many possible examples. I do not feel convinced by the claims of this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.235.173.250 (talk • contribs) 15:25, 4 October 2010

This article should be corrected with additional comments regarding why this study should NOT be considered definitive. Small study size, uncontrolled-for exposures, way too many unknowns that could not be controlled for, arrives at conclusions only vaguely supported by the findings (which themselves are weak and undependable). It is unfortunately used as a proof of epigenetics. KipHansen (talk) 14:42, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]