Just interested in why you think yasko is wrong. I have +/+ on both COMTs and MAO-A and have ruined sleep with methylfolate. Do you think my poor sleep is due to some other reason
You may well be sensitive to methylfolate and it may be responsible for your poor sleep but this has nothing to do with COMT and MAO A.
There is no research to support Yasko's claims about COMT and sensitivity to methyl donors. It was pure speculation on her part which became self-fulfilling. People with COMT+/+ were not given methyl donors just in case, then this quickly morphed into they don't tolerate methyl donors and this soon proliferated all over the internet.
Plenty of people, including myself, put it to the test and found that it didn't hold. Yes many are sensitive to methyl groups but it has little to do with COMT.
As for MAO A (and I'm assuming you mean R297R), again there is no research supporting Yasko's claims, though there is a lot of garbled nonsense written about this SNP.
Just looking at the name is enough to tell us that it doesn't amount to much. The arginine (R is an abbreviation for this amino acid) at position 297 remains as arginine. In other words the wildtype and variant proteins are identical. It is just not possible that the SNP produces a slower enzyme.
This SNP in itself does nothing.
There is some research suggesting it might be a proxy for some other SNP - I did try to chase this down, since I have this SNP, but didn't come up with anything convincing.
There is also research showing that, in combination with other SNPs, the nucleotide change, even though it doesn't result in protein change, can contribute to mRNA instability and so result in less protein. But this is in combination with several other SNPs and only in the right combination.
Finally there is the misinterpreted stuff about the warrior gene which is also used to make claims about this SNP. The warrier gene stuff refers to a repeat motif in the promoter region of the gene (this is upstream of the coding region) which affects the amount of enzyme formed - ie more or less MOA A, not faster or slower versions of the protein.
It was found that several SNPs, including R297R, might be proxies for the number of repeats in the promoter - but it is several SNPs in just the right combination, not R297R in itself.
Still this didn't stop the internet rumour mill from adding to the mythology about this SNP supposedly meaning a slower form of the enzyme.
So I repeat, in itself, the SNP has no effect. It may do something in combination with a number of other SNPs but it has to be in just the right combination.