Live data from Hacker News

New forms of 'racism' arise in science research

m.timesofindia.com

41–50 of 57 posts

Re: New forms of 'racism' arise in science research

#41
I see after I awaken in my time zone that there have been quite a few thoughtful comments on the interesting article kindly submitted here, many of them replies to top-level comments. For participants on Hacker News who like to read whole books or scientific articles on facts about the world they live in, I recommend a specialized bibliography on race

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:WeijiBaikeBianji/Anthropo...

kept in Wikipedia user space and updated from time to time. The actual articles on Wikipedia about the topic of "race" are mostly very low in quality and frequently edit-warred, with one of those articles being one of the ten most edit-warred articles on all of English Wikipedia.

The basic fact we can all rely on as we think about these issues is that we are all very closely related to one another, throughout humankind. Every human being is more closely related to and more similar to every other human being than most people imagine. That's a consistent finding of molecular genetics research.

The United States Census Bureau says

"The U.S. Census Bureau collects race data in accordance with guidelines provided by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and these data are based on self-identification. The racial categories included in the census questionnaire generally reflect a social definition of race recognized in this country and not an attempt to define race biologically, anthropologically, or genetically. In addition, it is recognized that the categories of the race item include racial and national origin or sociocultural groups. People may choose to report more than one race to indicate their racial mixture, such as 'American Indian' and 'White.' People who identify their origin as Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish may be of any race."

http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/meta/long_RHI525211.htm

In other words, "race" categories used by the United States government are arbitrary and are not based on science. A confirmation of this fact is the disagreement between any two countries' categories for "race"--the same individual can change categories as the individual crosses national borders.

Feldman, Marcus W.; Lewontin, Richard C. (2008). "Chapter 5: Race, Ancestry, and Medicine". In Koenig, Barbara A.; Lee, Sandra Soo-jin; Richardson, Sarah S. Revisiting Race in a Genomic Age. New Brunswick (NJ): Rutgers University Press. ISBN 978-0-8135-4324-6. is a good current book chapter on medical implications of race research informed by genetics. The article notes on page 93 "Finally, it must be borne in mind that the taxonomic problem cannot be inverted. That is, while clustering methods are capable of assigning an individual to a geographic population with a high degree of certainty, given that individual's genotype, it is not possible to predict accurately the genotype of an individual given his or her geographical origin. Thus, knowing an individual's ancestry only slightly improves the ability to predict his or her genotype. The more polymorphic the markers, the more difficult this is." Another book chapter, Harpending, Henry (2007). "Chapter 16: Anthropological Genetics: Present and Future". In Crawford, Michael. Anthropological Genetics: Theory, Methods and Applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 457. ISBN 978-0-521-54697-3, points out that "On the other hand, information about the race of patients will be useless as soon as we discover and can type cheaply the underlying genes that are responsible for the associations. Can races be enumerated in any unambiguous way? Of course not, and this is well known not only to scientists but also to anyone on the street." A specific example of "race" failing to explain a medical observation is hypertension (high blood pressure), already mentioned in this thread before I posted. The book chapter by a specialist on the development of blood pressure medicines, Kahn, Jonathan (13 August 2013). "Chapter 7: Bidil and Racialized Medicine". In Krimsky, Sheldon; Sloan, Kathleen. Race and the Genetic Revolution: Science, Myth, and Culture. Columbia University Press. p. 132. ISBN 978-0-231-52769-9. points out that "In medical practice what matters is our shifting understanding of the correlations between such evolving social identities and the evolving economic, political, and environmental conditions to which they may be related. For example, what are we to make of the fact that African Americans suffer from disproportionately high rates of hypertension, but Africans in Nigeria have among the world's lowest rates of hypertension, far lower than the overwhelmingly white population of Germany? Genetics certainly plays a role in hypertension. But any role it plays in explaining such differences must surely be vanishingly small."

I have been to different parts of the world, and have met people from all over the world. Sometimes I have met persons of one "race" who look just about exactly like people I know from another "race," and I have found kindred people (as to any personal characteristic you care to name) among people from all over the world of all different "races." The race categories are not informative, or at least not informative about individual genomes. In some societies, "race" is a salient enough category that an individual's personal experience can be profoundly influenced by race categorization. If you haven't read the book before, you could read the book Black Like Me by John Howard Griffin to learn more about that.

Re: New forms of 'racism' arise in science research

#42
post #27
post #2

If it's a fact, it's not racism. It's not personal. The fact that races diverged thousands of years ago suggest that they are genetically different through evolution. There's a lot to learn from genetic diversity rather than applying the racism badge to it every fucking time and ignoring it to pacify some over-sensitive idiots. This attitude is no better than witch hunts and mandatory religious laws. The contents and…

>If it's a fact, it's not racism. So many apologists here seem to think that you can just list facts, context-free, in some sort of objective manner. The way facts are presented are almost invariably enabling some sort of value judgement. For example, if you were to do a study on prison population in the US, you could end up presenting two facts : > blacks are dis-proportionally present in the prison population > poo…

You are right in saying that "blacks are dis-proportionally present in the prison population" does not prove that, if all factors were equal, people who happen to have darker skin are somehow predisposed to end up in prison. That statement on its own doesn't tell us much and endlessly repeating it is prone to lead to racist beliefs among many people.

However, research that shows a group of people with a common ancestry share a genetic trait that is known to make them more or less susceptible to a certain disease or more or less responsive to certain treatments IS showing a causal link. It is most certainly worth mentioning because it will lead to better medical treatment. This is not an uninformed judgement call based on a naive interpretation of complex social issues. This isn't social science. This is natural science.

I'm hopeful that this research will be done with as little mention of "race" as possible. Race is a social construct, this research is related to shared ancestry. It should be "we'll do a genetic test, and if you have this genetic marker, we'll do X, otherwise, we'll do Y." So many people in the US are of mixed ancestry that it is unlikely that any social definition of race is going to be useful for making medical decisions without a genetic test.

Re: New forms of 'racism' arise in science research

#43
post #2

If it's a fact, it's not racism. It's not personal. The fact that races diverged thousands of years ago suggest that they are genetically different through evolution. There's a lot to learn from genetic diversity rather than applying the racism badge to it every fucking time and ignoring it to pacify some over-sensitive idiots. This attitude is no better than witch hunts and mandatory religious laws. The contents and…

Human races haven't diverged, though. Divergence requires isolation that isn't present in humans. People are incredibly mobile and people of different races frequently intermarry, ensuring that any traits that emerge in one get shared with all the others.

Re: New forms of 'racism' arise in science research

#44
That entire article is nothing but moral supremacy dribble that's attacking science by using the R word to immediately claim victory and stop all discussion.

The people that used to wear white sheets on their heads, are now the same group of people that the author belongs to... They've just found a new way to make themselves feel superior.

They are the people that claim they are open minded, stand for diversity of ideas, and open discussions.

Yet the moment you present a counter-view to what they believe, you're a racist, a Nazi, your work should be shunned, and you should lose all chances of gainful employment.

Re: New forms of 'racism' arise in science research

#45
post #21
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The contents and tone of the article are awful and an affront to science and assume everything will result in Nazi eugenics programmes. Because also the nazi program started by saying "If it's a fact, it's not racism".

Aryan superiority was very much non-scientific and is a long way from any sort of fact. Either way, it's completely tangential. If certain nationalities are more prone to some diseases than others, then it's important to recognize this as it can be used for developing drugs that can help those nationalities directly. Sticking your head in the sand and chanting "race means nothing" doesn't help anybody dieing from a d…

This. It was more akin to religious thinking.

Re: New forms of 'racism' arise in science research

#46
post #27
post #2

If it's a fact, it's not racism. It's not personal. The fact that races diverged thousands of years ago suggest that they are genetically different through evolution. There's a lot to learn from genetic diversity rather than applying the racism badge to it every fucking time and ignoring it to pacify some over-sensitive idiots. This attitude is no better than witch hunts and mandatory religious laws. The contents and…

>If it's a fact, it's not racism. So many apologists here seem to think that you can just list facts, context-free, in some sort of objective manner. The way facts are presented are almost invariably enabling some sort of value judgement. For example, if you were to do a study on prison population in the US, you could end up presenting two facts : > blacks are dis-proportionally present in the prison population > poo…

> The way facts are presented are almost invariably enabling some sort of value judgement.

Yes, but then the problem is not with the facts themselves, but the way they have been used, and I took the grandparent statement to be talking about the facts themselves.

Re: New forms of 'racism' arise in science research

#47
post #2

If it's a fact, it's not racism. It's not personal. The fact that races diverged thousands of years ago suggest that they are genetically different through evolution. There's a lot to learn from genetic diversity rather than applying the racism badge to it every fucking time and ignoring it to pacify some over-sensitive idiots. This attitude is no better than witch hunts and mandatory religious laws. The contents and…

There's a lot to learn from genetic diversity Good comment. Hopefully this leads to some thought-provoking material... rather than applying the racism badge to it every fucking time and ignoring it to pacify some over-sensitive idiots. ... Oh. Nevermind. EDIT: I see that you're new to HN. Please don't write in such an inflammatory style. In addition to being against the rules, it's also ineffective.

I'm not new to HN.

Rules are subject to interpretation. If it draws attention to the point then it is perfectly valid. In fact I think it's just here. When your point opposes religious thinking then you have to throw your toys out of the pram.

If I'd posted this from my older account then the response would be different as HN treats older more established users differently.

Re: New forms of 'racism' arise in science research

#48
post #24
post #2

If it's a fact, it's not racism. It's not personal. The fact that races diverged thousands of years ago suggest that they are genetically different through evolution. There's a lot to learn from genetic diversity rather than applying the racism badge to it every fucking time and ignoring it to pacify some over-sensitive idiots. This attitude is no better than witch hunts and mandatory religious laws. The contents and…

> If it's a fact, it's not racism. It's not personal. The fact that races diverged thousands of years ago suggest that they are genetically different through evolution. The simple fact diverged doesn't tell us in what ways were they diverged. Bigotry can easily fill the remaining wholes in our knowledge (which are vast) and assume eg. that blacks are more prone to die young etc. Who cares if it needs tons of research…

You don't need to exclude social traits to get useful information but it does help objectivity. I assume your point is about the presentation of the facts rather than the facts themselves.

Your second point is unfortunately the sad truth.

Re: New forms of 'racism' arise in science research

#49
post #2

If it's a fact, it's not racism. It's not personal. The fact that races diverged thousands of years ago suggest that they are genetically different through evolution. There's a lot to learn from genetic diversity rather than applying the racism badge to it every fucking time and ignoring it to pacify some over-sensitive idiots. This attitude is no better than witch hunts and mandatory religious laws. The contents and…

Human races haven't diverged, though. Divergence requires isolation that isn't present in humans. People are incredibly mobile and people of different races frequently intermarry, ensuring that any traits that emerge in one get shared with all the others.

That's not strictly true. There are plenty of isolated genetic lines. This is a really big planet.

Things like sickle-cell and neurofibromatosis are worth studying only 2-3 generations back as well for example.

Re: New forms of 'racism' arise in science research

#50
post #27
post #2

If it's a fact, it's not racism. It's not personal. The fact that races diverged thousands of years ago suggest that they are genetically different through evolution. There's a lot to learn from genetic diversity rather than applying the racism badge to it every fucking time and ignoring it to pacify some over-sensitive idiots. This attitude is no better than witch hunts and mandatory religious laws. The contents and…

>If it's a fact, it's not racism. So many apologists here seem to think that you can just list facts, context-free, in some sort of objective manner. The way facts are presented are almost invariably enabling some sort of value judgement. For example, if you were to do a study on prison population in the US, you could end up presenting two facts : > blacks are dis-proportionally present in the prison population > poo…

What you choose to present is the problem. If you don't present all data then you're not providing an unbiased report.

The meaning of the data is another matter and wholly subject to interpretation by scientists, pseudo-scientists and crackpots alike.

There's too much woo and too many chipped shoulders and opportunists these days and they need a smackdown.

Post reply on HN