Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Overcoming Bias Commenter's avatar

"Imperfect correlation is OK."

The imperfect correlation of race with geographic ancestry (what the genetic variation actually determines) hurts the ability to use racial groups to predict phenotype.

"Lots of medical conditions are highly correlated with race in the folk-taxonomy phenotype-based concept of race."

True for rare recessive disorders, but frequently over interpreted. These correlations are almost exclusively the result of founder effects/bottlenecking/genetic drift, not selection. Quantitative traits, which are the majority of disease phenotypes, do not correlate well. Preventative medical interventions taken based on race for these conditions tend to be very low risk and are prescribed inefficiently (many treated people needed to see one beneficial outcome), such as diet, exercise, and statins. Race provides little predictive power outside of the extremes.

The difference between race and sex is that exceptions from the male/female dichotomy are rare, genetic abnormalities. While there are clusters of geographic ancestry, the exceptions in the continuum between these clusters are normal and the genetic variation is consistent with random, genetic drift.

"Ernst Mayr, who came up with the commonly used definition of "species" in biology, says race is just as valid a concept."

Absent data, Mayr's opinion is irrelevant regardless of previous contributions or his acknowledged brilliance. Furthermore, he did not have access to the expansive sequence data we have today. I would not presume to guess how these data would affect his opinion.

""Population" is just another word for "race" in genetics. A euphemism, if you will."

I won't. Race is a sloppy term that some equate to population. It does not go in the other direction. Population has explicit meaning. Race is one potential way to define a population. Race is a sub-optimal tool for defining discrete populations and adding efficiency to predictions.

"When discussing non-human species, scientists have no problem using the term "race"."

Personally, I do not know scientists (which puts both of our conclusions somewhere between all scientists and none) who discuss "races" of non-human species. You will hear the term "ecotypes," which implies adaptation to local environmental conditions. Just because scientists use the term does not make it valid.

Expand full comment
Overcoming Bias Commenter's avatar

Ernst Mayr, who came up with the commonly used definition of "species" in biology, says race is just as valid a concept.http://www.gnxp.com/MT2/arc..."Population" is just another word for "race" in genetics. A euphemism, if you will. When discussing non-human species, scientists have no problem using the term "race". The comments thread to this post discuss the two terms and their usefulness.http://www.gnxp.com/blog/20...

Expand full comment
11 more comments...

No posts