Posted on 12/21/2002 3:54:34 AM PST by Pharmboy
Scientists studying the DNA of 52 human groups from around the world have concluded that people belong to five principal groups corresponding to the major geographical regions of the world: Africa, Europe, Asia, Melanesia and the Americas.
The study, based on scans of the whole human genome, is the most thorough to look for patterns corresponding to major geographical regions. These regions broadly correspond with popular notions of race, the researchers said in interviews.
The researchers did not analyze genes but rather short segments of DNA known as markers, similar to those used in DNA fingerprinting tests, that have no apparent function in the body.
"What this study says is that if you look at enough markers you can identify the geographic region a person comes from," said Dr. Kenneth Kidd of Yale University, an author of the report.
The issue of race and ethnicity has forced itself to biomedical researchers' attention because human populations have different patterns of disease, and advances in decoding DNA have made it possible to try and correlate disease with genetics.
The study, published today in Science, finds that "self-reported population ancestry likely provides a suitable proxy for genetic ancestry." In other words, someone saying he is of European ancestry will have genetic similarities to other Europeans.
Using self-reported ancestry "is less expensive and less intrusive" said Dr. Marcus Feldman of Stanford University, the senior author of the study. Rather than analyzing a person's DNA, a doctor could simply ask his race or continent of origin and gain useful information about their genetic make-up.
Several scientific journal editors have said references to race should be avoided. But a leading population geneticist, Dr. Neil Risch of Stanford University, argued recently that race was a valid area of medical research because it reflects the genetic differences that arose on each continent after the ancestral human population dispersed from its African homeland.
"Neil's article was theoretical and this is the data that backs up what he said," Dr. Feldman said.
The new result is based on blood samples gathered from around the world as part of the Human Genome Diversity Project, though on a much less ambitious scale than originally intended. Dr. Feldman and his colleagues analyzed the DNA of more than 1,000 people at some 400 markers. Because the sites have no particular function, they are free to change or mutate without harming the individual, and can become quite different over the generations.
The Science authors concluded that 95 percent of the genetic variations in the human genome is found in people all over the world, as might be expected for a small ancestral population that dispersed perhaps as recently as 50,000 years ago.
But as the first human populations started reproducing independently from one another, each started to develop its own pattern of genetic differences. The five major continental groups now differ to a small degree, the Science article says, as judged by the markers. The DNA in the genes is subject to different pressures, like those of natural selection.
Similar divisions of the world's population have been implied by earlier studies based on the Y chromosome, carried by males, and on mitochondrial DNA, bequeathed through the female line. But both elements constitute a tiny fraction of the human genome and it was not clear how well they might represent the behavior of the rest of the genome.
Despite the large shared pool of genetic variation, the small number of differences allows the separate genetic history of each major group to be traced. Even though this split broadly corresponds with popular notions of race, the authors of Science article avoid using the word, referring to the genetic patterning they have found with words like "population structure" and "self-reported population ancestry."
But Dr. Feldman said the finding essentially confirmed the popular conception of race. He said precautions should be taken to make sure the new data coming out of genetic studies were not abused.
"We need to get a team of ethicists and anthropologists and some physicians together to address what the consequences of the next phase of genetic analysis is going to be," he said.
Some diseases are much commoner among some ethnic groups than others. Sickle cell anemia is common among Africans, while hemochromatosis, an iron metabolism disorder, occurs in 7.5 percent of Swedes. It can therefore be useful for a doctor to consider a patient's race in diagnosing disease. Researchers seeking the genetic variants that cause such diseases must take race into account because a mixed population may confound their studies.
The new medical interest in race and genetics has left many sociologists and anthropologists beating a different drum in their assertions that race is a cultural idea, not a biological one. The American Sociological Association, for instance, said in a recent statement that "race is a social construct" and warned of the "danger of contributing to the popular conception of race as biological."
Dr. Alan Goodman, a physical anthropologist at Hampshire College and an adviser to the association, said, "there is no biological basis for race." The clusters shown in the Science article were driven by geography, not race, he said.
But Dr. Troy Duster, a sociologist at New York University and chairman of the committee that wrote the sociologists' statement on race, said it was meant to talk about the sociological implications of classifying people by race and was not intended to discuss the genetics.
"Sociologists don't have the competence to go there," he said.
And that is totally ridiculous. The Krakatoa volcano spewed a dust cloud that lasted for two years. There was no worldwide faunal destruction caused by it. There is no evidence of any species having been affected by this Toba eruption either. Man is far more adaptable than other species so there is absolutely no reason to assume that more humans died as a result of such an eruption than other species unless all of them lived near the volcano which is obviously false. Like the rest of evolutionary theory this is just pseudo-scientific nonsense.
It is not objective to look at individuals as part of a group. It is not objective to classify individuals statistically. It is not objective to tar a whole group with the sins (or genetic traits) of some in that group. This study is racist, it tries to look at people not as human beings, not as individuals, but as racial groups. Further it tries to give scientific support to the point of view that one can look at individuals as part of a group instead of as individuals.
There is therefore no objective reason for this study. It is a shameful use of public moneys to support racism and has absolutely no scientifically useful purpose. And BTW - what the heck is NASA doing funding this nonsense? What does it have to do with exploring space?
Well, the Americas were biologically isolated from the rest of the world for some 10,000 years and there has never been a problem of reproduction between Americans and Europeans. So much for your stupid theory of evolution. Also, neither group developed any abilities while isolated that showed it to be in any way more biologically 'advanced' than the other. Evolution requires new more advanced functions. Wherever we look we don't see that.
I think they already leaped past that one. The politicians, the media and the universities have spend trillions over the past 20 years to educate us that there are no gender differences.
Perhaps it is you that needs a biology course. We have just recently found that the 95% of DNA which is not in genes does indeed have a purpose. In fact it is far more important than the DNA in genes since the genes would not function without it. We are thus just beginning to discover what all this DNA does. There is still much DNA for which we do not know the purpose of. However, that does not mean that it does not have a purpose as this nonsensical study assumes. For example we do know that there are strong environmental reasons for skin pigmentation. Not only humans, but all species are of lighter coloring in colder regions than in equatorial regions.
In order to treat "the individual" properly, a diagnosis must be made. In order to do that, a history and physical must be done, along with appropriate laboratory screening tests. Knowing a person's ethnic/genetic background allows for a much more efficient approach to the individual.
As far as your stuff about environment affecting skin color,so what? Of course it does, just like it affects everything else (more or less). Our genes give us a range, our environment puts us in specific point in that range.
Dr. Alan Goodman, a physical anthropologist at Hampshire College and an adviser to the association, said, "there is no biological basis for race."
But....but....but,how can we trust the leftist dogma that all people came from Africa,and that blacks are the true master race if this is true? Do you mean to say you and your fellow lefties are lying to us when you say "our diversity is our strength!"? How can there be diversity if we are all the same? I guess this means there is no longer any reason for affirmative-action and quotas,either? This is all SOOOO confusing!
They are also closely related to the Mari,a tribe of the original people from what is now called the "Mari Republic" in Russia.
Why will it be a good thing to see the white people become extinct? Was it good to see various Indian tribes in the US dissapear? What about the Polynesians and the original Hawiaans? They have mostly dissapeared or will soon dissapear.
We're dealing with an order of magnitude. Toba was a 'super-volcano' and Krakatoa wasn't. The faunal loss due to Toba is well documented.
In humans, that is partly due to lack of sufficent amounts of sunlight, vitamin D.
LOL
That is a poor excuse. To make a proper diagnosis one has to look for evidence, not for statistics - as I said. While some traits may be found more in some groups than others, hardly any are unique to any one group so one must test if one suspects a genetic reason for a problem.
As far as your stuff about environment affecting skin color,so what?
It means that species have the ability to adapt to the environment without mutation. A total disproof of the theory of evolution which proposes that it is mutations which create adaptability. It is ludicrous to say that all species randomly mutate their coloring in the same way.
And the loss is documented where? What species died from it?
In humans, that is partly due to lack of sufficent amounts of sunlight, vitamin D.
There you go, adaptation without mutation.
I don't care enough about convincing you to do the work required. The data is available if you care to search for it.
".... This sounds impressive until you compare it to a Super Volcano. Seventy-four thousand years ago, the eruption of Toba in Sumatra threw a total of about 670 cubic miles (2800 km3) of erupted material (about 480 cubic miles [2000 km3] of which was ash) into the air. This amount of ash in the upper atmosphere would have severely altered the temperature and weather patterns of the planet. Common estimates put it in the range of 18° to 36° F (10° to 20°C) drops in middle to high latitudes. With so much sunlight being blocked out, it is believed that a large percentage, around 75 percent, of plant life in the Northern Hemisphere was killed off and all of the animals that relied on them would have perished as well. To make matters worse, this effect continued unabated for four or five years. Some believe that this event pushed mankind to the brink of extinction, perhaps reducing the number of species to mere thousands. What of Toba today? Well, when Toba erupted it created a massive crater, called a caldera, 62 miles (100 km) long and 19 miles (30 km) wide that filled with water to form a lake. The middle of the lake floor later uplifted and formed the island of Samosir. Uplifts are not uncommon in large calderas and are attributed to the pressure of unerupted magma still trying to reach the surface...."
The last eruption of a super volcano was in Toba, Sumatra, 75,000 years ago. It had 10,000 times the explosive force of Mount St. Helens and changed life on Earth forever. Thousands of cubic kilometres of ash was thrown into the atmosphere - so much that it blocked out light from the sun all over the world. 2,500 miles away 35 centimetres of ash coated the ground. Global temperatures plummeted by 21 degrees. The rain would have been so poisoned by the gasses that it would have turned black and strongly acidic. Man was pushed to the edge of extinction, the population forced down to just a couple of thousand. Three quarters of all plants in the northern hemisphere were killed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.