Talk:Familial natural short sleep

Regarding "Notable people"

Just because people say they don't sleep a lot, they don't necessarily have this gene. I find this list misleading. PersonWhoLikesSudoku (talk) 18:27, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I came here just to say the same thing. Only people with this mutation should be listed here. 2001:9E8:A597:6C00:A0F5:74D1:5A38:56C0 (talk) 21:07, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I removed this section for the stated arguments. Pmigdal (talk) 17:12, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Major change to "Genetics" section and removal of "History" section

This reference is quite new but very conclusively demonstrates that the previously identified "short-sleeper variants" (and other similar mutations) in fact have no detectable effect on sleep duration in the population at large. The paper itself is quite diplomatic and states that the mutations may be of low, non-zero penetrance, but does raise the suggestion that the purported genetic explanation was simply mistaken in at least some cases.

I have summarised its implications in my edit. Given that it's highly likely that the previous research was mistaken, it seemed unnecessary to include text going into such exhaustive detail about each individual study and mutation. One caveat is that NPSR1 mutants were not found in the biobanks used and so could not be analysed -- quite suspicious, given that the original study allegedly found several carriers in only a few hundred people... -- so I would be willing to accept a different wording in the article stating that the role of this gene is not yet debunked. It seems appropriate to retain Fu's name in the new version given that she was named five times in the previous text.

This is a major change and I am willing to accept a middle ground between my suggested edit and the previous text. Massivefranklin (talk) 15:42, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

More of the article could probably be changed. The claim that the condition is autosomal dominant largely rests on these likely debunked findings. Indeed, both citations given in the "inheritance" section go via OMIM to those Fu papers. However, I don't know of any good sources that state outright that this phenotype is likely not autosomal dominant, so I'll probably hold off on this. (The null result might need some time to percolate throughout the literature.) Massivefranklin (talk) 17:42, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]