Human Races

I would have to wonder where the line is between races then? I might go to the Niger river valley and notice that the people look different than those in the Yangtze river, but what if instead I tried to compare those who live near Kilamanjaro (sp?). What if I choose between the Niger and the Blue Nile? Or, what comparison could be made between those who live in the Yangtze river valley and the steppes of mongolia or from the steps of mongolia to the Urals? There is NO fine line between what seperates races, and distinctions between populations are usually if not always greater within a population than across populations.How many races would there be? Where would you place Eqyptians or Libyans who live in Africa yet many have features that are distinct and different than say the Masai or !Kung? How about the aboriginies? They have what some constitute african features but don't live in africa? What about the ainu of Japan? What "race" are they? I could go on...The point is that this unit called "race" is an aribitrary system of classification with no basis in genetics. The questions that comes about are: What are the distinctions between the races? If you ask different people how many "races" there exist in the world I'd bet you'd get as many different answers.

The clinal model is unable to distinguish between distinct "races." In fact there are some traits which are discontinuous or have non-clinal distribution patterns. You may find several discontinuous pockets within clinal regions. The problem is that the human population have been migrating for so long and interbreeding that the distinctions are difficult if not impossible. The patterns we find in human populations are too complex and shifting so much that defining what constitutes a "race" is impossible.

www.cartage.org.lb"Unlike the typological and populational models, the clinal model does not result in the definition of distinct groups or races of people."Page Not Found | Yale University(koenig).pdfYALE JOURNAL OF HEALTH POLICY, LAW, AND ETHICS
The Meanings of Race in the New Genomics:
Implications for Health Disparities Research
Sandra Soo-Jin Lee, Ph.D.,* Joanna Mountain, Ph.D., and Barbara A.
Koenig, Ph.D., (2001)"In this paper we provide a strong critique of the continued use of race as a legitimate scientific variable. We offer an historical analysis of how the concept of race has changed in the United States and discuss the reification of race in health research. We discuss how genetic technology has been deployed in proving racial identity, and describe the consequences of locating human identity in the genes. The implications of the continued use of race in the new genomic medicinein particular the creation of racialized diseasesis highlighted. We warn about the consequences of a shift toward population-based care, including targeted genetic screening for racially identified at-risk groups, including the potential for stigmatization and discrimination. A less commonly identified hazard is the epistemological turn towards genetic reductionism. We suggest that the application of a nive genetic determinism will not only
reinforce the idea that discrete human races exist, but will divert attention from the complex environmental, behavioral, and social factors contributing to an excess burden of illness among certain segments of the diverse U.S. population. The intersection of the genomics revolution with the health disparities initiative should serve as a catalyst to a long overdue public policy debate about the appropriate use of the race concept in biomedical research and clinical practice.""The widely accepted consensus among evolutionary biologists and
genetic anthropologists is that biologically identifiable human races do not exist; Homo sapiens constitute a single species, and have been so since their evolution in Africa and throughout their migration around the world.18 Population genetics provides the best evidence for this conclusion: The genetic variation within a socially recognized human population is greater than the genetic variation between population groups." Ahh, but we aren't talking about seperating colors now are we? While clinal models show that there is some genetic differences coresponding with geography, it is usually discontinuous. Never mind the fact that human populations have been migrating for ages. Look at a clinal map! Are you suggesting that those areas of high incidence for B blood allele correspond with a "race"? Or hemoglobin S clinal distributions correspond with a "race"? You realize that many of these groups overlap? Of what use is the use of a clinal model distiniction for "race" if they overlap? The best that can be said is that there is the possibility of regional genetic differences when diagnosing a medical condition but you'd have to be careful in classification because of the amount of discontinuities. If it were only so simple as to assume that ALL African-Americans had high rates of hypertension or that ALL indigenous populations (by the way I am assuming you are talking about Native Americans and not all indigenous populations) have skyrocketing rates of diabetes. What is the cause for these problems? Genetic? Possibly but certainly not for ALL. Is hypertension just an effect relating to their environment in the U.S? Racial biases that lead to increased poverty risk would make a lot of people hypertensive. Is there a genetic disposition for diabetes among Native Americans or just a penchant for Mountain Dew? I'd be surprised if there isn't a skyrocketing rate for diabetes among MOST americans regardless of ethnicity. fixed url to keep page from becoming too wide - The Queen[This message has been edited by AdminAsgara, 10-29-2003]

Here is a snippet which points out a couple of figures.This one is from Washington University:
Biological differences among races do not exist, WU research shows
The Record - The Source - Washington University in St. Louis"Templeton analyzed genetic data from mitochondrial DNA, a form inherited only from the maternal side; Y chromosome DNA, paternally inherited DNA; and nuclear DNA, inherited from both sexes. His results showed that 85 percent of genetic variation in the human DNA was due to individual variation. A mere 15 percent could be traced to what could be interpreted as "racial" differences.
"The 15 percent is well below the threshold that is used to recognize race in other species," Templeton said. "In many other large mammalian species, we see rates of differentiation two or three times that of humans before the lineages are even recognized as races. Humans are one of the most genetically homogenous species we know of. There's lots of genetic variation in humanity, but it's basically at the individual level. The between-population variation is very, very minor.""ahh just thought I'd add this in as well http://notes.utk.edu/bio"Concludes Howard L. McLeod, a professor of medicine at the Washington University School of Medicine in Missouri, "There is no clear link between skin pigment and drug metabolism genes. Skin pigment is a lousy surrogate for drug metabolism status or most any aspect of human physiology."10"10 H.L. McLeod, "Pharmacogenetics: more than skin deep," Nature Genetics, 29:247-8, November 2001.[This message has been edited by DBlevins, 10-29-2003] edited url to fix page width - The Queen[This message has been edited by AdminAsgara, 10-29-2003]