THE ROBERT W. WHITAKER ARCHIVE

"RACE DOES NOT EXIST" -- ANOTHER PC MYTH GOES DOWN | 2006-05-18

The Wall Street Journal is America's most fanatically anti-white national publication. They want third world immigration desperately.

The official WSJ position has for decades been that an amendment to the US Constitution should be passed that simply says:

"There shall be no borders."

But even WSJ has to sometimes report the truth:

http://www.racesci.org/in_media/genetic_markers.htm

Race Linked to Genetic Markers

CHRISTOPHER WINDHAM

Wall Street Journal, 02/01/2005

In the latest study to wade into the question of whether race is a biologically based

category or a socially constructed label, scientists at Stanford University claim to have

found that 326 genetic 'markers' -- segments of DNA -- can be used to cluster people into

four groups, with each group corresponding to common racial categories: white,

African-American, East Asian and Hispanic.

For more than a decade some geneticists and anthropologists have argued that race isn't

biologically real and therefore shouldn't be used in medical research and clinical practice.

The argument is based on the fact that, for

thousands of years, humans have been marrying and having children with people of different ancestry, with the result that everyone's genes come from the same big, humanwide pool.

The mapping of the human genome and growing interest in race-based pharmaceuticals have stirred the debate in recent years.

The study, published in the February issue of the American Journal of Human Genetics, involved 3,636 people enrolled in a large trial on the genetics of hypertension. To see

whether genetic markers correspond to the standard racial categories, the scientists first analyzed the volunteers' DNA, identifying which genetic markers they carried. They then used

a computer program to cluster people based on genetic similarities; those who shared genetic markers were grouped together. Finally, the scientists compared those groupings with the volunteers' self-identified race. The result: people who considered themselves white had

been grouped by the computer, based on their genetic markers, in one cluster, while people who consider themselves African-American had been grouped in a second, different cluster.

The same held for Hispanics and East Asians. Only five people had DNA that matched an ethnic group different than the racial or ethnic box they checked at the outset of the tudy.

"People have argued that race and ethnicity are purely social categories," says Neil Risch, the study's lead author, who is director of the Center for Human Genetics at the University

of California, San Francisco. "We've shown that socially defined ethnic categories correspond with genetic categories." The findings are convincing because of the large number of genetic markers -- 326 -- used to cluster the participants, he says.

The study of the relationship between race and genetics largely is viewed in the medical community as a way to better understand why some ethnic groups suffer and die

disproportionately from certain illnesses than others. It also could help physicians predict which patients might respond better to certain drugs, geneticists say.

But using random genetic markers to show links to ancient geographic ancestry doesn't reveal much about how such markers might be predictive in disease, says geneticist J. Craig Venter,

who led the private effort to sequence the human genome and is part of the J. Craig Venter Institute. The markers aren't actually genes, but merely segments of DNA whose function is unknown.

COMMENTS (4)

#1 Al Jolson | 2006-05-18 15:16

Sounds like a good argument for the State to arrange marriages to help us overcome our genetic differences.

#2 joe odin | 2006-05-19 23:43

This is BIG. This is like the old days when a small town newspaper would report last...everything first was reported by the NY Times or Journal, then big city newspapers, then smaller county papers, then small town papers. It seems to be in reverse now...first are the independent reporters (Bob's blog, internet discussion groups, etc), then big internet pages such as yahoo, then finally the newspapers. This is more proof that newspapers are so out of the times that it is laughable.

The Wall Street journal is now the hick of reporting!

#3 Elizabeth | 2006-05-21 13:58

Good!

Like the bone marrow thing -- you can spout all the theory

you want to, but not paying attention to biology (DNA

markers) can literally kill you.

Along the same lines as the DNA marker story, there are occasional

biographies and autobiographies of blacks in which the writer

discusses cousins who "chose to live as white" because they could

pass. Sometimes, these individuals married whites.

I call myself a historian, but I'm in the type of history that

utilizes a lot of "social science," especially anthropology.

Studies of race and/or ethnicity have usually been done on the

basis of how the subjects of the study designate themselves.

Until recently, there was no alternative.

#4 Elizabeth | 2006-05-21 13:58

NOT SPAM

Good!

Like the bone marrow thing -- you can spout all the theory

you want to, but not paying attention to biology (DNA

markers) can literally kill you.

Along the same lines as the DNA marker story, there are occasional

biographies and autobiographies of blacks in which the writer

discusses cousins who "chose to live as white" because they could

pass. Sometimes, these individuals married whites.

I call myself a historian, but I'm in the type of history that

utilizes a lot of "social science," especially anthropology.

Studies of race and/or ethnicity have usually been done on the

basis of how the subjects of the study designate themselves.

Until recently, there was no alternative.