You’d like me to point out where you’ve only referenced individual papers for particular ideas and concepts? I can do that but I’d appreciate an answer to my question first if that’s okay.
May I ask what your respective scientific and genetics backgrounds are? I ask because this piece reads like many pieces where enthusiastic non-scientists pull together a bunch of papers without being able to assess the quality of those papers. I've also noticed a behaviour where you can't assess the quality of a paper then you over-estimate the positive effects that confirm your beliefs and ignore potential negative effects. This is an odd approach for most biologists I've worked with but is pretty typical of a layman. You also happy to work with single papers for many of your ideas, which again is something laymen inexperienced with scientific problems would do.
A side question: Why do you believe Claude/ChatGPT (not sure which model versions you used) can summarise this ‘common wisdom’? I’ve seen LLMs used in similar ways by other users and I don’t understand why or when it became commonly agreed LLMs could do this with any believability.
The genetic portions of this seem like a manifesto for creating highly intelligent, highly depressed, and thus highly unproductive people.
If you have listened to the episode it would be nice to relay what those details were. I'm not so interested in listening to a 2 hour podcast mostly about what I just read above to get a few sentences of detail especially so when Gene is here! I'm also keen to know about Kman's background too.