Blonds get last laugh after media's gaffe - Bad reports cited study predicting extinction of blondes

The New York Times ^ | October 2, 2002 | The New York Times Staff

[MeekOneGOP]

Blonds get last laugh after media's gaffe

Erroneous reports cited study predicting extinction of towheads

10/02/2002

The New York Times

Apparently it fell into the category "too good to check."

On Friday, several British newspapers reported that the World Health Organization had found in a study that blonds would become extinct within 200 years, because blondness was caused by a recessive gene that was dying out. The reports were repeated Friday by anchors for the ABC News program Good Morning America and on Saturday by CNN.

There was only one problem, the health organization said in a prepared statement Tuesday: It had never reported that blonds would become extinct, and it had never done a study on the subject.

"WHO has no knowledge of how these news reports originated," the organization, a Geneva-based agency of the United Nations, announced, "but would like to stress that we have no opinion of the future existence of blonds."

All the news reports in Britain and the United States cited a study from the World Health Organization - "a blonde-shell study," as The Daily Star of London put it. But none reported any scientific details from the study or the names of the scientists involved.

On Good Morning America, Charles Gibson began a conversation with his co-anchor, Diane Sawyer, by saying: "There's a study from the World Health Organization, this is for real, that blonds are an endangered species. Women and men with blond hair, eyebrows and blue eyes, natural blonds, they say will vanish from the face of the Earth within 200 years, because it is not as strong a gene as brunets'."

Jeffrey Schneider, a spokesman for ABC News, said the anchors got the information from an ABC producer in London who said he had read it in a British newspaper.

Journalists in London said the source of the reports was probably one of several news agencies used by the British press, but it remained unclear which one.

---

Online at: http://www.dallasnews.com/latestnews/stories/100202dnintblonde2.61359.html

[OldBlondBabe]

I guess we should expect the RH-negative (blood) factor to disappear as well. It is also recessive.

[Fintan]

Hey, when did Switzerland move????

[chance33_98]

I guess then, (depending on the genes of my children's mates) I could have a red-haired grand-baby?

Now accepting rich granparent applications :)

[Publius6961]

Yep; after a thousand years blondes and blue eyes still keep popping up in the middle east, from prisoners traded during the "golden age" of Islam.

[OldBlondBabe]

"So if homosexuality is genetic and they do not reproduce why do we still have them?


And your evidence that homosexuality is genetic is what? You pose this question as proof of something?"


I've found this an interesting argument. The gays claim to be "born that way" which would indicate genetics, yet if researchers found a "gay gene" would couples (discovering this with prenatal tests) consider aborting their "gay" fetus?

[Publius6961]

Blonde? and a father?
I sure hope you mean blond...

[McLynnan]

Where's Nord with our picture?

How did the blonde explain how his helicopter crashed?

He said it was getting cold, so he turned off the ceiling fan.

[Copernicus]

What I haven't seen is an honest analysis and description of how population genetics work, in a way that demonstrates this purported phenomenon is bogus. Please help us to understand how this allele will not die out.

It's called the 3 percent rule. Nature abhors absolutes. Even if 97 percent of a population is affected by some environmental condition sufficient to cause death at least 3 percent will be resistant to that exact condition and will propagate to form a replacement population. Thus even decendants of Dinosauers still walk the earth today.

The sun could go nova tomorrow and enough terrestrial life has already escaped from Earth to eventually seed a new planet somewhere far, far away from this solar system. It would not necessarily be recognizable to the current population of Earth but it would be from and of the Earth. This would, of course, include some form of the blonde gene.

Hope this helps.

Best regards,

[Under the Radar]

Yes, it does help, thank you. :)

[WilliamWallace1999]

In genetics, an allele (alternative form of a gene) that will show in the phenotype observed characteristics of an organism) only if its partner allele on the paired chromosome is similarly recessive. Such an allele will not show if its partner is dominant, that is if the organism is heterozygous for a particular characteristic. Alleles for blue eyes in humans and for shortness in pea plants are recessive. Most mutant alleles are recessive and therefore are only rarely expressed.

For every characteristic of a plant or animal that is inherited, there are two genes present in the cells determining this characteristic in all but a few examples. By characteristic we mean height or eye colour or ability to make a particular enzyme. If the two genes are identical (homozygous state) the characteristic you see in the organism is determined by the two genes. However, one gene may be different from the other (heterozygous state). If so, the two genes are alleles contrasting genes for a characteristic. In this case it is possible that one of them determines the characteristic you see and the other does not. The characteristic you see in this case is said to be dominant. The other allele not expressed in this case will only be expressed when present in the homozygous state. This characteristic is said to be recessive.

Sometimes the allele that produces the dominant characteristic is described as being a dominant allele and the one that tends to produce the recessive characteristic as being the recessive allele. This is not really the correct use of the terms dominant and recessive. An allele is one of two or more alternative forms of a gene. This is best explained with examples. A gene which tends to produce blue eyes in a person will have an alternative allele that tends to produce brown eye colour. In a plant that may be found in tall and short forms may have an allele that tends to produce tall plants though its alternative allele produces short plants.


In real people terms, a single-gene change cannot "die-out". If a single member of a couple carries the recessive trait but is brunette, fifty percent of the kids will have the carrier state. If both members of a couple are carriers that are brunette; they will have 25% blonds, 50% brunettes that are carriers; and only 25% "pure" brunettes. The reason for the vast range of shades seen in our world is a condition called variable penetrance (stop smirking), in which the dominant gene is not able to totally shut down expression of the recessive gene.

[WilliamWallace1999]

So if homosexuality is genetic and they do not reproduce why do we still have them? ;)

You make a great point, but that is an erroneous use of the term genetic. If homosexuality is inherited, it is better termed a multifactoral type inheritance. This is also the case with conditions like cleft lip and palate. They occur less that 1% of the time in general population, but occur at a rate of 5-10% in families with a prior history. That is about the same pattern seen with homosexuality. The word genetic technically means inheritance linked to a specific gene or group of genes and follows a pattern of inheritance predictable by the chromosomes on which it resides (sex-link or autosomal). Blonds will keep popping up no matter what we do to stop them.

[Always Right]

Yep; after a thousand years blondes and blue eyes still keep popping up in the middle east, from prisoners traded during the "golden age" of Islam.

Besides, as long as there are any blondes out there, I will do all I can to make sure their genes go on.

[chance33_98]

Blonds will keep popping up no matter what we do to stop them.

I have no plans on stopping them :)

I agree with you though, I was thinking about that recently while studying genetic algotrithms (which are pretty cool). So gays are either 'genetic' anomalies or they just like being gay and it has nothing to do with genetics at all. I don't care either way but I was just wondering :) Thanks for the post!

[NordP]

Here I....I mean WE are!

NordP

[PBRSTREETGANG]

Besides, as long as there are any blondes out there, I will do all I can to make sure their genes go on.

The first step is making their jeans come off.

[warchild9]

Here's something wacky: my mother's family is all dark-haired (all Swedish, second-generation), and she turned out blonde. My father has dark hair and brown eyes, and my sister and I both have blond hair and blue eyes. My brother-in-law has dark hair and brown eyes, and all my nieces are blonde/blue. The Mrs. has dark hair and brown eyes; what are the odds our children will beat the odds?

[McLynnan]

Thanks, Nordie! So nice we are all natural blondes with none of those telltale roots.

[gracie1]

As long as there's Clarol, there will always be blonds!

[balrog666]

What? No pictures of the Swedish Bikini Team yet????

Well, I can fix that:

Swedish Bikini Team on Display!

[Mo1]

TAKE BACK THE SENATE!

VOTE OUT THE DEMS!

DONATE TODAY!!!. SUPPORT FREE REPUBLIC

Donate Here By Secure Server

Or mail checks to
FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794

or you can use

PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com
STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD