ITT: San Francisco violently denies the importance of race for bone marrow transplants.
Cultural differences may leave their mark on DNA
11–20 of 87 posts
Re: Cultural differences may leave their mark on DNA
#12"conclusion is that "race" is not just a social construct"
I mean, come on. This is news? What was he thinking were the different crime rates come from?
Re: Cultural differences may leave their mark on DNA
#13Earlier quoted context omitted.
How did you come up with that? Did you even understand the article? It is quite literally saying social/cultural changes leave an impact on genetic transcription of DNA through methylation and epigenetic markup. In fact, this proves just the opposite. That social factors are intricately tied to genetic output. What this proves false are the hardliners of each side of the debate that espouse race is a purely social co…
I am not a geneticist, so perhaps I misunderstand, but the conclusion I formed seems to be reinforced by the quotes from the authors in the article. That is, there are specific gene expressions which are relevant in a medical context affected by cultural factors that are genetically transmitted. Genetic transmission at least to me implies that a person receives these things from their parents at birth, regardless of…
Gene expression is partially inherited and partially a product of environment. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgenerational_epigenetic_i...
The classic example discussed is a study of children born during a famine. Children born during famine are going to be smaller than normal, but it was found that their children and grandchildren would be born smaller than normal, even though the famine has long since passed. This change has been attributed to a particular methylation pattern that was passed down.
It's known that things like exposure to famine and abuse can change methylation patterns, but this study suggests that non-traumatic things like your cultural upbringing can affect methylation.
Re: Cultural differences may leave their mark on DNA
#14Looks like the TL;DR conclusion is that "race" is not just a social construct, but actually has genetic markers which are expressed beyond ethnic heritage. As the authors conclude, this could be extremely important in tailoring medical treatments for people for differences in their genetic makeup based on their race. In other words harder sciences are proving that social sciences obsession with identity politics has…
Biological populations certainly do exist, it's just that they don't correlate well with prevailing concepts of "race". The average western African is more similar to the average European than to the average southern African.
Populations in Africa are also genetically more diverse than the rest of the world combined.
Re: Cultural differences may leave their mark on DNA
#15Earlier quoted context omitted.
Actually the genetic differences between races are far smaller and more blurry than most people would imagine (based on differences in appearance). The Atlantic had an article about exactly the kind of thing you're taking about, and how this kind of pseudoscience is being pushed by neo-nazis and the alt-right: http://www.theatlantic.com/amp/article/510962/
Thanks for once again proving that nobody can ever have a serious discussion about science related to ethnicity because someone will always jump up, point at them, and scream "racist". I wonder if it's occurred to you how many people suffer from medical conditions because they're either untreated or treated poorly because we don't bother studying and reporting on things like this, specifically and exactly because the…
I think he's responding to the line "harder sciences are proving that social sciences obsession with identity politics has hindered medical advancements" which I would consider false. The existence of genetic diseases that are largely present in a single race has been known for a long time. Tay-Sachs is seen almost entirely in Ashkenazi Jews, Sickle Cell is mostly seen in Africans, etc. I don't think "identity politics" is rejecting this notion, or if it is it's doing a bad job of it.
Re: Cultural differences may leave their mark on DNA
#16Looks like the TL;DR conclusion is that "race" is not just a social construct, but actually has genetic markers which are expressed beyond ethnic heritage. As the authors conclude, this could be extremely important in tailoring medical treatments for people for differences in their genetic makeup based on their race. In other words harder sciences are proving that social sciences obsession with identity politics has…
Actually my read was that environment can influence epigenetic markers, and that environment is measureable in aggregate based on ethnicity - in this study.
The study does not compare other groupings of people who share a common environment and the influence on their epigenetic markers.
It says nothing about identity politics.
Re: Cultural differences may leave their mark on DNA
#17Looks like the TL;DR conclusion is that "race" is not just a social construct, but actually has genetic markers which are expressed beyond ethnic heritage. As the authors conclude, this could be extremely important in tailoring medical treatments for people for differences in their genetic makeup based on their race. In other words harder sciences are proving that social sciences obsession with identity politics has…
Actually my read was that environment can influence epigenetic markers, and that environment is measureable in aggregate based on ethnicity - in this study.
The study does not compare other groupings of people who share a common environment and the influence on their epigenetic markers.
It says nothing about identity politics.
Re: Cultural differences may leave their mark on DNA
#18Looks like the TL;DR conclusion is that "race" is not just a social construct, but actually has genetic markers which are expressed beyond ethnic heritage. As the authors conclude, this could be extremely important in tailoring medical treatments for people for differences in their genetic makeup based on their race. In other words harder sciences are proving that social sciences obsession with identity politics has…
Actually my read was that environment can influence epigenetic markers, and that environment is measureable in aggregate based on ethnicity - in this study.
The study does not compare other groupings of people who share a common environment and the influence on their epigenetic markers.
It says nothing about identity politics.
Re: Cultural differences may leave their mark on DNA
#19Looks like the TL;DR conclusion is that "race" is not just a social construct, but actually has genetic markers which are expressed beyond ethnic heritage. As the authors conclude, this could be extremely important in tailoring medical treatments for people for differences in their genetic makeup based on their race. In other words harder sciences are proving that social sciences obsession with identity politics has…
"Race" has 2 meanings.
1. Race as a social construct. It does exist in that capacity - as an extreme example Irish were not considered "white" in America (google for some "hilarious" images from "back in the day").
2. Race as a biological reality. This is a touchy subject for a variety of reasons. But that doesn't mean that well documented taxonomic differences between human races are "fake". They do exist and are more than "skin deep" - things like bone density, cranial capacity, maturation etc etc. Ask your dentist if he can tell by looking at someone's jaw x-ray whether it belongs to an east asian or sub-saharan african.
Re: Cultural differences may leave their mark on DNA
#20Cultural changes rate are too infinitesimal compared to the time which is required for any genetic change to get a chance to form and propagate through a population to attain a stable presence (forming a distinct trait).
The probability that a certain cultural difference induced mutation could be formed (given that there is no flow of information from a phenotype back to genotype) is something incalculable.
What might work for a bacteria does not work for humans due to, you see, fundamental differences in the reproductive system and development.
There are a few main principles from genetics 101 to consider before making any attempts of "doing science".
1. all mutations are *random*
2. there is no backward flow of information
3. environment does not alter DNA. random mutations do
4. propagating of a mutation is an extremely rare event
5. it takes *many* generations.
There is another fundamental principle: way to many hipsters in what they call "modern science".