High IQ people may think something is wrong with them

Teachers gave special attention to the intellectually gifted Mel Jäger ever since the first grade - without making the young student "stand out."
"There was no outing: the IQ test didn't change anything in my life," says Jäger, now 34, and a board member of the German chapter of the Mensa association for the highly gifted. To be accepted to the group you need an IQ of at least 130.
However not every Mensa member gets such good support. Quite a few feel held back or that they rub people the wrong way, and have been bullied.
Sometimes those with a high IQ think they are the problem, Mensa members said in a meeting of the group in Mainz in western Germany.
Some only come to realize during psychotherapy that their problems are related to their giftedness.
Mensa has many gifted people recognized later in life
"All my life I thought I had a screw loose," says an engineer from the Ruhr area, who wants to remain anonymous except for his first name, Peter. After taking the IQ test at the age of 54, he only then understood "why I was always an intellectual outsider and lonely."
At work, he usually had to take a back seat. "I did everything on the side to get ahead. That was 30 years of hard work," says Peter, 59.
"Late bloomers make up a huge part of our community," says Sybille Beyer, spokeswoman for Mensa Germany. That feeling of relief after finding out they have a high IQ happens often, she says.
It's the feeling that "I'm not wrong, I'm just different." She says it's similar to Hans Christian Andersen's fairy tale of the ugly duckling that wanders around, feeling like he doesn't fit in - until he stumbles upon a flock of swans and realizes he's not a duck but a beautiful swan.
Beyer, 61, knows what they are talking about. In primary school, she taught herself to read, was top of the class for years, but was held back.
"Nah, I'm not taking you on now, you always know everything anyway," she says, describing her experience with teachers. Later, she often had the feeling that, as a person, she was "always running into a brick wall."
A book about highly gifted people that she got from her hairdresser was the turning point for Beyer. She was already 53 years old at the time. "As I read, I thought, someone is writing about my life," she says. And her relief: "You can throw off all the guilt about not being able to fit in."
Expert: Highly intelligent people on average more satisfied
"On average, highly intelligent people get through school, college and training better, are more successful in their careers, and are healthier and happier in life than non-highly gifted people," says Detlef H Rost, an emeritus psychology professor at the University of Marburg.
"So giftedness is more of a protective factor than a risk factor for development and coping with life," he says.
"It is not giftedness itself that leads to problems for a person, but the behaviour displayed" – and that of their important caregivers, Rost says.
Good standardized tests are "very meaningful" in Rost's view. They are even among the best diagnostic tools in psychology.
Highly gifted people have an IQ of at least 130
Of the roughly 70 million adults living in Germany, around 1.4 million are highly gifted, says Rost. According to its own figures, the Mensa association, founded in 1979, now has more than 18,000 members, making it the largest network for highly intelligent people in Germany. That means the vast majority are not organized in an association.
"Here you can develop acquaintances you can work with immediately - within five minutes or after two sentences," says Peter from the Ruhr area. The realization that she is highly gifted has changed her private life, reports Beyer. Mensa helped her find her way out of loneliness.
The average age of Mensa members in Germany is around 38, says Jäger, who prefers plural pronouns. Around two-thirds are men and one-third women, with the proportion of diverse people growing.
The professional field is diverse, and the number of members is increasing significantly, partly because autism and ADHD are being tested more frequently and the IQ is often determined from those tests, says Jäger.
"You meet interesting people here and learn unexpected things that you would never come across otherwise," says Annette, 54, who does not want to give her last name. She's learned about tax returns, elementary physics, archaeology and artificialintelligence from the group, she says.
"You get very interesting ideas here," says another Mensa member named Peter, from Cologne, talking about a 62-kilometre route in Nepal to Mount Everest Basecamp. The computer scientist is now studying physics so that he won't get bored after retirement.
There are many facets to giftedness, says Beyer. The Mensa association's activities are therefore very diverse. Both the regulars' tables and the German meetings, such as the one in Mainz, welcome non-members. "It's not as if you're a completely different person with an IQ of 130 or more."
Global links too
Mensa members say a few preferences and behaviours are often found among the highly gifted: fast speech, an aversion to "meaningless small talk" but a tendency to jump quickly from topic to topic in conversations – and a penchant for tricky games.
"Loud noises, harsh light, too many people, a mad rush – that's something that many of us find very difficult to take," reports Beyer. And younger people in particular usually seek contact with older people.
Annette, a pharmacist, has daughters who are also highly gifted. She can't say whether this makes family life easier. "At any rate, we've put up a 'nerd sanctuary' sign at home."
"Mensa is my chosen family," says Jäger from Münster. "You come into contact with people you wouldn't otherwise have known."
This applies worldwide, as the umbrella organization has 150,000 members.
"With the Couchsurfing programme, for example, you can find a place to stay anywhere at any time," says Jäger. They have already planned their entire holiday with Mensa members from around the world.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Medscape

16 hours ago

• Medscape

Exceptional Use Recommendation for Nuclear Emergency Drug

The European Medicines Agency's (EMA) Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) has recommended an exceptional circumstances marketing authorization for Imreplys. The drug — active ingredient sargramostim and manufactured by Partner Therapeutics Ltd — is intended to treat people with hematopoietic acute radiation syndrome (H-ARS) following acute exposure to myelosuppressive doses of radiation. H-ARS occurs when radiation suppresses bone marrow hematopoiesis, leading to an increased risk for infection and bleeding. It occurs after whole-body radiation doses of about 1-6 Gy, most often associated with acute exposure following radiologic or nuclear emergencies. Sargramostim, a granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor, counteracts H-ARS by inducing the bone marrow to produce immune-protective leukocytes, including granulocytes, macrophages, and monocytes, as well as red blood cells and platelets. The positive opinion means that Imreplys is now indicated for treatment of patients of all ages with H-ARS following acute exposure to myelosuppressive doses of radiation. It has also been used in the US in patients aged 2 years or older to prevent serious infection in conditions such as leukemia, bone marrow transplant, and prechemotherapy blood cell collection. As well as the infection risk, symptoms of H-ARS may include those of anemia, petechiae, and prolonged bleeding, starting 1-6 hours after exposure and lasting up to 2 days. Exceptional Circumstances Authorization Recommended Medicines can be authorized under exceptional circumstances, subject to certain specific obligations where the applicant was unable to provide comprehensive data on the efficacy and safety of the medicine under normal conditions of use. This may be because the condition that the drug is to be used for is too rare for extensive data gathering; because of limited scientific knowledge in the area concerned; or because collection of full information is not possible or is unethical. Exceptional circumstances authorization must be reviewed annually. The CHMP said that three randomized, blinded, placebo-controlled studies in rhesus monkeys who received H-ARS-inducing total body irradiation showed that Imreplys increased 60-day survival rates compared with placebo. Studies had also shown faster recovery of absolute neutrophil counts and platelets, reduced infection rates, and fewer signs of sepsis. The most common side effects with Imreplys include fever, diarrhea, vomiting, skin reactions, rash, asthenia, metabolic laboratory abnormalities, malaise, high glucose, abdominal pain, weight loss, low albumin, pruritus, gastrointestinal hemorrhage, chills, pharyngitis, bone pain, chest pain, hypomagnesemia, hematemesis, arthralgia, anxiety, and eye hemorrhage. Use Governed by Radiologic/Nuclear Emergency Recommendations The EMA said that Imreplys will be available as a 250 μg powder for solution for injection and should be used in accordance with official radiologic/nuclear emergency recommendations. Detailed recommendations for the use of the product will be described in the summary of product characteristics (SmPC), which will be published on the EMA website in all official European Union languages after the marketing authorization has been granted by the European Commission.

The Verge

17 hours ago

• The Verge

You sound like ChatGPT

Join any Zoom call, walk into any lecture hall, or watch any YouTube video, and listen carefully. Past the content and inside the linguistic patterns, you'll find the creeping uniformity of AI voice. Words like 'prowess' and 'tapestry,' which are favored by ChatGPT, are creeping into our vocabulary, while words like 'bolster,' 'unearth,' and 'nuance,' words less favored by ChatGPT, have declined in use. Researchers are already documenting shifts in the way we speak and communicate as a result of ChatGPT — and they see this linguistic influence accelerating into something much larger. In the 18 months after ChatGPT was released, speakers used words like 'meticulous,' 'delve,' 'realm,' and 'adept' up to 51 percent more frequently than in the three years prior, according to researchers at the Max Planck Institute for Human Development, who analyzed close to 280,000 YouTube videos from academic channels. The researchers ruled out other possible change points before ChatGPT's release and confirmed these words align with those the model favors, as established in an earlier study comparing 10,000 human- and AI-edited texts. The speakers don't realize their language is changing. That's exactly the point. One word, in particular, stood out to researchers as a kind of linguistic watermark. 'Delve' has become an academic shibboleth, a neon sign in the middle of every conversation flashing ChatGPT was here. 'We internalize this virtual vocabulary into daily communication,' says Hiromu Yakura, the study's lead author and a postdoctoral researcher at the Max Planck Institute of Human Development. ''Delve' is only the tip of the iceberg.' But it's not just that we're adopting AI language — it's about how we're starting to sound. Even though current studies mostly focus on vocabulary, researchers suspect that AI influence is starting to show up in tone, too — in the form of longer, more structured speech and muted emotional expression. As Levin Brinkmann, a research scientist at the Max Planck Institute of Human Development and a coauthor of the study, puts it, ''Delve' is only the tip of the iceberg.' AI shows up most obviously in functions like smart replies, autocorrect, and spellcheck. Research out of Cornell looks at our use of smart replies in chats, finding that use of smart replies increases overall cooperation and feelings of closeness between participants, since users end up selecting more positive emotional language. But if people believed their partner was using AI in the interaction, they rated their partner as less collaborative and more demanding. Crucially, it wasn't actual AI usage that turned them off — it was the suspicion of it. We form perceptions based on language cues, and it's really the language properties that drive those impressions, says Malte Jung, Associate Professor of Information Science at Cornell University and a co-author of the study. This paradox — AI improving communication while fostering suspicion — points to a deeper loss of trust, according to Mor Naaman, professor of Information Science at Cornell Tech. He has identified three levels of human signals that we've lost in adopting AI into our communication. The first level is that of basic humanity signals, cues that speak to our authenticity as a human being like moments of vulnerability or personal rituals, which say to others, 'This is me, I'm human.' The second level consists of attention and effort signals that prove 'I cared enough to write this myself.' And the third level is ability signals which show our sense of humor, our competence, and our real selves to others. It's the difference between texting someone, 'I'm sorry you're upset' versus 'Hey sorry I freaked at dinner, I probably shouldn't have skipped therapy this week.' One sounds flat; the other sounds human. For Naaman, figuring out how to bring back and elevate these signals is the path forward in AI-mediated communication, because AI is not only changing language — but what we think. 'Even on dating sites, what does it mean to be funny on your profile or in chat anymore where we know that AI can be funny for you?' Naaman asks. The loss of agency starting in our speech and moving into our thinking, in particular, is what he is worried about. 'Instead of articulating our own thoughts, we articulate whatever AI helps us to articulate…we become more persuaded.' Without these signals, Naaman warns, we'll only trust face-to-face communication — not even video calls. We lose the verbal stumbles, regional idioms, and off-kilter phrases that signal vulnerability, authenticity, and personhood The trust problem compounds when you consider that AI is quietly establishing who gets to sound 'legitimate' in the first place. University of California, Berkeley research found that AI responses often contained stereotypes or inaccurate approximations when prompted to use dialects other than Standard American English. Examples of this include ChatGPT repeating the prompt back to the non-Standard-American-English user due to lack of comprehension and exaggerating the input dialect significantly. One Singaporean English respondent commented, 'the super exaggerated Singlish in one of the responses was slightly cringeworthy.' The study revealed that AI doesn't just prefer Standard American English, it actively flattens other dialects in ways that can demean their speakers. This system perpetuates inaccuracies not only about communities but also about what 'correct' English is. So the stakes aren't just about preserving linguistic diversity — they're about protecting the imperfections that actually build trust. When everyone around us starts to sound 'correct,' we lose the verbal stumbles, regional idioms, and off-kilter phrases that signal vulnerability, authenticity, and personhood. We're approaching a splitting point, where AI's impacts on how we speak and write move between the poles of standardization, like templating professional emails or formal presentations, and authentic expression in personal and emotional spaces. Between those poles, there are three core tensions at play. Early backlash signals, like academics avoiding 'delve' and people actively trying not to sound like AI, suggests we may self-regulate against homogenization. AI systems themselves will likely become more expressive and personalized over time, potentially reducing the current AI voice problem. And the deepest risk of all, as Naaman pointed to, is not linguistic uniformity but losing conscious control over our own thinking and expression. The future isn't predetermined between homogenization and hyperpersonalization: it depends on whether we'll be conscious participants in that change. We're seeing early signs that people will push back when AI influence becomes too obvious, while technology may evolve to better mirror human diversity rather than flatten it. This isn't a question about whether AI will continue shaping how we speak — because it will — but whether we'll actively choose to preserve space for the verbal quirks and emotional messiness that make communication recognizably, irreplaceably human.

Yahoo

18 hours ago

• Yahoo

'Brutal' type of fasting diet better for weight loss than any other

Fasting on alternate days may help shave off the pounds better than other intermittent fasting and calorie restriction diets, according to a new study. While scientists have called for more work to confirm the findings, a new review suggests the so-called feast and famine approach to dieting may have greater benefits when it comes to weight loss. Alternate day fasting involves a 24-hour fast on alternate days and has become more popular in recent years. Other intermittent fasting approaches to dieting have also grown in popularity, including time restricted eating, where people only eat for a certain number of hours in the day, such at the 16:8 diet involving a 16-hour fasting period followed by an eight-hour eating; and whole day fasting, which includes the 5:2 diet involving five days of eating and two days of fasting periods. Researchers from Scotland, the US, Canada and Germany wanted to compare fasting methods to continuous energy restriction diets by looking at all of the available evidence. They examined data from 99 studies involving more than 6,500 people. READ MORE: 'Moral obligation' to save special Surrey building as £200k of extra repair work approved READ MORE: The gorgeous Surrey lido in the grounds of a rustic hotel at the base of a famous hill People involved in the studies had an average body mass index (BMI) of 31 and almost nine in 10 (89%) had pre-existing health conditions. The research team found that both intermittent fasting diets and calorie restricted diets led to weight loss. But compared with continuous energy restriction, alternate day fasting was the only strategy to show benefit in body weight reduction, with people on this diet losing 1.29kg more, according to the study, which has been published in The BMJ. The authors said that alternate day fasting showed a 'trivial' reduction in body weight compared with both time restricted eating and whole day fasting 'Minor differences were noted between some intermittent fasting diets and continuous energy restriction, with some benefit for an alternate day fasting strategy with weight loss in shorter duration trials,' the authors wrote. 'All intermittent fasting strategies and continuous energy restriction diets showed a reduction in body weight when compared with an ad-libitum diet 'Of three intermittent fasting diets (ie, alternate day fasting, time restricted eating, and whole day fasting), alternate day fasting showed benefit in body weight reduction compared with continuous energy restriction.' Around 29% of adults in the UK are obese. Last week the NHS ' top doctor said that weight loss jabs could be as transformative as statins. Later this month GPs in England will be allowed to prescribe mounjaro, also known as tirzepatide, for the first time. Patients previously needed to access the drugs through a special weight loss service.