Lay opinion vs evidence: Sportgene Frauen

The question of sports genes in women exemplifies the gap between lay opinion and evidence. Many direct-to-consumer tests claim to identify optimal training or sport based on variants like ACTN3 (the 'sprinter gene') or ACE. The evidence: effect sizes are small—these genes explain only a tiny fraction of performance variance. For women, hormonal cycles, training history, and psychological factors play a much larger role. GWAS studies show associations but not causal prediction for individuals. Evidence grade is at best 'gwas' or 'mechanistic', often 'marketing'. A test may satisfy curiosity but cannot guide training decisions. Without professional interpretation, misinterpretation is likely. Bottom line: sport genetics is a research area, not a diagnostic tool.