...
EgyptSearch Forums Post New Topic  New Poll  Post A Reply
my profile | directory login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» EgyptSearch Forums » Egyptology » O.T. Races Exist: Global variation in copy number in the human genome (Page 1)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 5 pages: 1  2  3  4  5   
Author Topic: O.T. Races Exist: Global variation in copy number in the human genome
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 10 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Race can be determined biologically according to these scientists!

******

Access to the full Nature article (free):

http://tinyurl. com/y4alme


[URL=http://tinyurl. com/y4alme]Nature Web Site[/URL] Overview today in the Independent (the best popular story I've seen so far):

http://tinyurl. com/yh7kp2


Genetic breakthrough that reveals the differences between humans
Scientists hail genetic discovery that will change human understanding

By Steve Connor, Science Editor
Published: 23 November 2006

Scientists have discovered a dramatic variation in the genetic make-up of humans that could lead to a fundamental reappraisal of what causes incurable diseases and could provide a greater understanding of mankind.

The discovery has astonished scientists studying the human genome - the genetic recipe of man. Until now it was believed the variation between people was due largely to differences in the sequences of the individual " letters" of the genome.

It now appears much of the variation is explained instead by people having multiple copies of some key genes that make up the human genome.

Until now it was assumed that the human genome, or "book of life", is largely the same for everyone, save for a few spelling differences in some of the words. Instead, the findings suggest that the book contains entire sentences, paragraphs or even whole pages that are repeated any number of times.

The findings mean that instead of humanity being 99.9 per cent identical, as previously believed, we are at least 10 times more different between one another than once thought - which could explain why some people are prone to serious diseases.

The studies published today have found that instead of having just two copies of each gene - one from each parent - people can carry many copies, but just how many can vary between one person and the next.

The studies suggest variations in the number of copies of genes is normal and healthy. But the scientists also believe many diseases may be triggered by an abnormal loss or gain in the copies of some key genes.

Another implication of the finding is that we are more different to our closest living relative, the chimpanzee, than previously assumed from earlier studies. Instead of being 99 per cent similar, we are more likely to be about 96 per cent similar.

The findings, published simultaneously in three leading science journals by scientists from 13 different research centres in Britain and America, were described as ground-breaking by leading scientists.

"I believe this research will change for ever the field of human genetics," said Professor James Lupski, a world authority on medical genetics at the Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, Texas.

Professor Lupski said the findings superseded the basic principles of human genetics that have been built up since the days of Gregor Mendel, the 19th century "father" of Mendelian genetics, and of Jim Watson and Francis Crick, who discovered the DNA double helix in 1953.

"One can no longer consider human traits as resulting primarily from [simple DNA] changes... With all respect to Watson and Crick, many Mendelian and complex traits, as well as sporadic diseases, may indeed result from structural variation of the genome," Professor Lupski said.

Deciphering the three billion letters in the sequence of the human genome was once likened to landing on the Moon. Having now arrived, scientists have found the "lunar landscape" of the genome is very different from what they expected.

Matthew Hurles, one of the project's leaders at the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute in Cambridge, said the findings show each one of us has a unique pattern of gains and losses of entire sections of our DNA.

"One of the real surprises of these results was just how much of our DNA varies in copy number. We estimate this to be at least 12 per cent of the genome - that has never been shown before," Dr Hurles said.

Scientists have detected variation in the "copy number" of genes in some individuals before but the sheer scale of the variation now being discovered is dramatic.

"The copy number variation that researchers had seen before was simply the tip of the iceberg, while the bulk lay submerged, undetected," Dr Hurles said.

"We now appreciate the immense contribution of this phenomenon to genetic differences between individuals, " he said.

The studies involved a detailed and sophisticated analysis of the genomes of 270 people with Asian, African or European ancestry. It was important to include as wide a sample of the human gene pool as possible.

They found that 2,900 genes could vary in the number of copies possessed by the individuals. The genes involved multiple copies of stretches of DNA up to a million letters of the genetic code long.

"We used to think that if you had big changes like this, then they must be involved in disease. But we are showing that we can all have these changes," said Stephen Scherer of the Howard Hughes Medical Institute in Chevy Chase, Maryland.

But it is also becoming apparent that many diseases appear to be influenced by the number of copies of certain key genes, said Charles Lee, another of the project's leaders at the Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School in Boston, Massachusetts.

"Many examples of diseases resulting from changes in copy number are emerging. A recent review lists 17 conditions of the nervous system alone, including Parkinson's disease and Alzheimer's, that can result from such copy number changes," Professor Lee said.

"Indeed, medical research will benefit enormously from this map, which provides new ways for identifying genes involved in common diseases," he said.

Mark Walport, director of the Wellcome Trust, the medical charity that funded much of the research, said: "This important work will help to identify genetic causes of many diseases."

The key questions answered

What have scientists discovered today?

They have found that each of us is more different genetically than we previously believed. Instead of being 99.9 per cent identical, it may turn out to be more like 99 per cent identical - enough of a difference to explain many variations in human traits. Instead of having just two copies of every gene - one from each parent - we have some genes that are multiplied several times. Furthermore these "multiple copy numbers" differ from one person to another, which could explain human physical and even mental variation.

Why does this matter?

One practical benefit is that it could lead to a new understanding of some of the most difficult, incurable diseases. Although it adds an extra layer of complexity to our understanding of the human genome, the discovery could lead eventually to new insights and medical treatments of conditions ranging from childhood disorders to senile dementia. Scientists are predicting for instance that the knowledge could lead to new diagnostic tests for such diseases as cancer.

How was this discovery made?

Scientists have developed sophisticated methods of analysing large segments of DNA over recent years. "In some ways the methods we have used are 'molecular microscopes' , which have transformed the techniques used since the foundation of clinical genetics where researchers used microscopes to look for visible deletions and rearrangements in chromosomes, " explained Nigel Carter of the Sanger Institute in Cambridge.

What genes are copied many times and why?

There are just under 30,000 genes in the human genome, which consists of about 3 billion "letters" of the DNA code. The scientists found that more than 10 per cent of these genes appear to be multiplied in the 270 people who took part in the study. They do not know why some genes are copied and some are not. One gene, called CCL3L1, which is copied many times in people of African descent, appears to confer resistance to HIV. Another gene involved in making a blood protein is copied many times in people from south-east Asia and seems to help against malaria. Other research has shown that variation in the number of copies of some genes is involved in Alzheimer's and Parkinson's disease.

Are there any other practical applications?

The scientists looked at people from three broad racial groups - African, Asian and European. Although there was an underlying similarity in terms of how common it was for genes to be copied, there were enough racial differences to assign every person bar one to their correct ethnic origin.This might help forensic scientists wishing to know more about the race of a suspect.

Who made the discovery and where can we read more about it?

Scientists from 13 research centres were involved, including Britain's Sanger Institute in Cambridge, which also took a lead role in deciphering the human genome. The research is published in Nature, Nature Genetics and Genome Research.

Scientists have discovered a dramatic variation in the genetic make-up of humans that could lead to a fundamental reappraisal of what causes incurable diseases and could provide a greater understanding of mankind.

The discovery has astonished scientists studying the human genome - the genetic recipe of man. Until now it was believed the variation between people was due largely to differences in the sequences of the individual " letters" of the genome.

It now appears much of the variation is explained instead by people having multiple copies of some key genes that make up the human genome.

Until now it was assumed that the human genome, or "book of life", is largely the same for everyone, save for a few spelling differences in some of the words. Instead, the findings suggest that the book contains entire sentences, paragraphs or even whole pages that are repeated any number of times.

The findings mean that instead of humanity being 99.9 per cent identical, as previously believed, we are at least 10 times more different between one another than once thought - which could explain why some people are prone to serious diseases.

The studies published today have found that instead of having just two copies of each gene - one from each parent - people can carry many copies, but just how many can vary between one person and the next.

The studies suggest variations in the number of copies of genes is normal and healthy. But the scientists also believe many diseases may be triggered by an abnormal loss or gain in the copies of some key genes.

Another implication of the finding is that we are more different to our closest living relative, the chimpanzee, than previously assumed from earlier studies. Instead of being 99 per cent similar, we are more likely to be about 96 per cent similar.

The findings, published simultaneously in three leading science journals by scientists from 13 different research centres in Britain and America, were described as ground-breaking by leading scientists.

"I believe this research will change for ever the field of human genetics," said Professor James Lupski, a world authority on medical genetics at the Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, Texas.

Professor Lupski said the findings superseded the basic principles of human genetics that have been built up since the days of Gregor Mendel, the 19th century "father" of Mendelian genetics, and of Jim Watson and Francis Crick, who discovered the DNA double helix in 1953.

"One can no longer consider human traits as resulting primarily from [simple DNA] changes... With all respect to Watson and Crick, many Mendelian and complex traits, as well as sporadic diseases, may indeed result from structural variation of the genome," Professor Lupski said.

Deciphering the three billion letters in the sequence of the human genome was once likened to landing on the Moon. Having now arrived, scientists have found the "lunar landscape" of the genome is very different from what they expected.

Matthew Hurles, one of the project's leaders at the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute in Cambridge, said the findings show each one of us has a unique pattern of gains and losses of entire sections of our DNA.

"One of the real surprises of these results was just how much of our DNA varies in copy number. We estimate this to be at least 12 per cent of the genome - that has never been shown before," Dr Hurles said.

Scientists have detected variation in the "copy number" of genes in some individuals before but the sheer scale of the variation now being discovered is dramatic.

"The copy number variation that researchers had seen before was simply the tip of the iceberg, while the bulk lay submerged, undetected," Dr Hurles said.

"We now appreciate the immense contribution of this phenomenon to genetic differences between individuals, " he said.

The studies involved a detailed and sophisticated analysis of the genomes of 270 people with Asian, African or European ancestry. It was important to include as wide a sample of the human gene pool as possible.

They found that 2,900 genes could vary in the number of copies possessed by the individuals. The genes involved multiple copies of stretches of DNA up to a million letters of the genetic code long.

"We used to think that if you had big changes like this, then they must be involved in disease. But we are showing that we can all have these changes," said Stephen Scherer of the Howard Hughes Medical Institute in Chevy Chase, Maryland.

But it is also becoming apparent that many diseases appear to be influenced by the number of copies of certain key genes, said Charles Lee, another of the project's leaders at the Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School in Boston, Massachusetts.

"Many examples of diseases resulting from changes in copy number are emerging. A recent review lists 17 conditions of the nervous system alone, including Parkinson's disease and Alzheimer's, that can result from such copy number changes," Professor Lee said.

"Indeed, medical research will benefit enormously from this map, which provides new ways for identifying genes involved in common diseases," he said.

Mark Walport, director of the Wellcome Trust, the medical charity that funded much of the research, said: "This important work will help to identify genetic causes of many diseases."

The key questions answered

What have scientists discovered today?

They have found that each of us is more different genetically than we previously believed. Instead of being 99.9 per cent identical, it may turn out to be more like 99 per cent identical - enough of a difference to explain many variations in human traits. Instead of having just two copies of every gene - one from each parent - we have some genes that are multiplied several times. Furthermore these "multiple copy numbers" differ from one person to another, which could explain human physical and even mental variation.

Why does this matter?

One practical benefit is that it could lead to a new understanding of some of the most difficult, incurable diseases. Although it adds an extra layer of complexity to our understanding of the human genome, the discovery could lead eventually to new insights and medical treatments of conditions ranging from childhood disorders to senile dementia. Scientists are predicting for instance that the knowledge could lead to new diagnostic tests for such diseases as cancer.

How was this discovery made?

Scientists have developed sophisticated methods of analysing large segments of DNA over recent years. "In some ways the methods we have used are 'molecular microscopes' , which have transformed the techniques used since the foundation of clinical genetics where researchers used microscopes to look for visible deletions and rearrangements in chromosomes, " explained Nigel Carter of the Sanger Institute in Cambridge.

What genes are copied many times and why?

There are just under 30,000 genes in the human genome, which consists of about 3 billion "letters" of the DNA code. The scientists found that more than 10 per cent of these genes appear to be multiplied in the 270 people who took part in the study. They do not know why some genes are copied and some are not. One gene, called CCL3L1, which is copied many times in people of African descent, appears to confer resistance to HIV. Another gene involved in making a blood protein is copied many times in people from south-east Asia and seems to help against malaria. Other research has shown that variation in the number of copies of some genes is involved in Alzheimer's and Parkinson's disease.

Are there any other practical applications?

The scientists looked at people from three broad racial groups - African, Asian and European. Although there was an underlying similarity in terms of how common it was for genes to be copied, there were enough racial differences to assign every person bar one to their correct ethnic origin. [Big Grin] This might help forensic scientists wishing to know more about the race of a suspect. [Big Grin]

Who made the discovery and where can we read more about it?

Scientists from 13 research centres were involved, including Britain's Sanger Institute in Cambridge, which also took a lead role in deciphering the human genome. The research is published in Nature, Nature Genetics and Genome Research.

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Apocalypse
Member
Member # 8587

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Apocalypse     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Dr. Winters wrote:
quote:
The scientists looked at people from three broad racial groups - African, Asian and European. Although there was an underlying similarity in terms of how common it was for genes to be copied, there were enough racial differences to assign every person bar one to their correct ethnic origin. This might help forensic scientists wishing to know more about the race of a suspect.
Dr. Winters think about it: They used some criterion to separate people into groups to begin with. They concluded that there are differences in the rate with which these people copy some genes.
No one has ever said that there are no observable differences among people from different regions. Why do you consider differential rates of production of the genes in question as greater proof of the existence of race than the primary set of criteria used to separate the individuals in the first place?


quote:
They have found that each of us is more different genetically than we previously believed. Instead of being 99.9 per cent identical, it may turn out to be more like 99 per cent identical - enough of a difference to explain many variations in human traits. Instead of having just two copies of every gene - one from each parent - we have some genes that are multiplied several times. Furthermore these "multiple copy numbers" differ from one person to another, which could explain human physical and even mental variation.
You highlighted the last paragraph above but it seems to me they're talking about individual differences here not racial differences. How does this help you?
Posts: 1038 | From: Franklin Park, NJ | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rasol
Member
Member # 4592

Icon 1 posted      Profile for rasol     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
^ Good citation, Dr. Winters. You are referencing current science which is a step in the right direction.

However this article about the use of genetics in medicine does not claim that race can be determined biologically.

What Lupski does claim is that the number of replications of some genes varies in individuals, species and groups more than was previously thought.

In this study he also tested distinct ethnic groups using parent offspring trio's for the Yoruba [YRI] Nigerians, and white(?) people from Utah [CEU], as well as unrelated Chinese and Japanese.

It's not suprising that family trios of Utah would cluster together relative to Yoruba Nigerians, Chinese and Japanese....you could easily reproduce that result using autosomal distance, or Y chromosome [Utah white will have lots of R1b and I, Yoruba will have lots of E3a].

The ability to find different gene frequencies in different ethnic groups is nothing new, and you can do this - within - typological races as well as between them.

There are only two results that are "surprising", the relative similarity of results among Chinese and Japanese...and the fact that some of the "Europeans" of Utah [CEU] appear to be intermediate with respect to Yoruba, other "Europeans" and Chinese/Japanese.

And, at least one of the Chinese is closer to the parent/sibling groups of Utah than to any of the other Chinese, while one of the Utah/Europeans is further away from the others in his assigned group, than the Chinese is.

This certainly doesn't 'prove' race typology, and in fairness, no one associated with the study claims otherwise....

 -

Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Calypso

quote:

Dr. Winters think about it: They used some criterion to separate people into groups to begin with. They concluded that there are differences in the rate with which these people copy some genes.
No one has ever said that there are no observable differences among people from different regions. Why do you consider differential rates of production of the genes in question as greater proof of the existence of race than the primary set of criteria used to separate the individuals in the first place?



Because these geneticists claim they can differiate people into racial categories based on biological differences.

I am not the one claiming race exist it was these scientists from the 13 leading genetic research institutions in the WORLD.

This finding is by geneticists. A group of scientists many people on this forum trust and believe in.

.

--------------------
C. A. Winters

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rasol
Member
Member # 4592

Icon 1 posted      Profile for rasol     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Because these geneticists claim they can differiate people into racial categories based on biological differences.
No they do not. The populations were separated into 4 distinct ethnic groups beforehand.

Concievably you could separate out 4 populations in Nigeria, or in Utah for that matter and still produce 4 distinct, Nigerian, or Utah clusters.

Would that prove the existence of 4 Nigeria races, or 4 Utah races, or 4 Chinese races? No.

Nor do the authors claim otherwise.

The only one claiming the study validates race, is you.

Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Apocalypse
Member
Member # 8587

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Apocalypse     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Dr. Winters wrote:
quote:

Because these geneticists claim they can differiate people into racial categories based on biological differences.

So what? The factors underlying the criteria used to separate the individuals into groups in the first place (probably hair texture, skin color, etc.,)are also biological. How does that prove the reality of races? No one has ever contended that there are no regional differences among people.
Posts: 1038 | From: Franklin Park, NJ | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
This is your opinion. The article speaks for itself. It makes it clear that races can be dertermined biologically.

.

--------------------
C. A. Winters

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rasol
Member
Member # 4592

Icon 1 posted      Profile for rasol     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
No one has ever contended that there are no regional differences among people.
Precisely.

Differences between individuals guarantees differences between regions.

So if you divide people in regions [A,B,C]....you can find differences between A,B and C...if you look for them, but this might be true even if the divisions did not correspond to preconceived 'racial' types.

Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rasol
Member
Member # 4592

Icon 1 posted      Profile for rasol     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
This is your opinion. The article speaks for itself.

Yes the article speaks for itself.

quote:
It makes it clear that races can be dertermined biologically.
The study does *not* claim that...that is *your* opinion. You are dangerously close to mis-citing your source material again, and error that dogs your linguistic works.

Your opinion is rooted more in wishful thinking, leaping to wild conclusions ,and hearing only what you want to hear, than anything else. [Cool]

Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
King_Scorpion
Member
Member # 4818

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for King_Scorpion     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Sorry Clyde, but highlighting a couple sentences out of an entire article does not prove race exists biologically.
Posts: 1219 | From: North Carolina, USA | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Apocalypse
Member
Member # 8587

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Apocalypse     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Rasol wrote:
quote:
Differences between individuals guarantees differences between regions.

So if you divide people in regions [A,B,C]....you can find differences between A,B and C...if you look for them, but this might be true even if the divisions did not correspond to preconceived 'racial' types.

Excellent point Rasol. I'm sure as you pointed out above even in a national entity such as Nigeria you might find observable regional differences - and therefore according to Dr. Winters's logic: racial differences.
Posts: 1038 | From: Franklin Park, NJ | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Calypso
quote:


Excellent point Rasol. I'm sure as you pointed out above even in a national entity such as Nigeria you might find observable regional differences - and therefore according to Dr. Winters's logic: racial differences.


You keep saying Winters' logic. It is the article by 13 leading genectic research institutes that claims race exist.

You guys seem to have blinders on. You continue to claim race does not exist when the scientists you admire claim otherwise.

I feel sorry for you guys . This is why you guys argue about history on this forum instead of writing it. You create a dream world in which race does not exist while the science you hold sacre continues to preach its reality
.

.

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rasol
Member
Member # 4592

Icon 1 posted      Profile for rasol     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
You keep saying Winters' logic. It is the article by 13 leading genectic research institutes that claims race exist.
Now your comments are bordering on the delusional.

No geneticist in the article you cited makes any such claim.

quote:
I feel sorry for you guys . This is why you guys argue about history on this forum instead of writing it
^ And now you sound frustrated.

Why would that be?

Perhaps because you have no scientific basis for your racial ideology.

So....you are reduced to scouring the internet seeking anything faintly resembling 'support'.

You find none.

So the best you can do is distort the works of real scholars who do not agree with you.

You do the same thing with your language work.

Seems a tad obsessve, no?

Disagree?

Ask yourself a question.

Who is the delusional obsessive who started this thread?

That's the guy you should feel sorry for. [Eek!]

Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Supercar
Member
Member # 6477

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Supercar         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
It should become apparent by now, that what you are up against here, is not some goal towards fact-seeking, but some subjective ideology. How many threads have been created on this very same issue, did it change the participants' views? Fact-seeking entails the discredited viewpoint to be tossed out the window [which in this case, involves making human "races" a biologically valid concept], but when this doesn't happen, then the driving force for such becomes all too apparent.
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Supercar
Member
Member # 6477

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Supercar         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by rasol:

quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:

It makes it clear that races can be dertermined biologically.

The study does *not* claim that...that is *your* opinion. You are dangerously close to mis-citing your source material again,...
...because of this:

Although there was an underlying similarity in terms of how common it was for genes to be copied, there were enough racial differences to assign every person bar one to their correct ethnic origin. This might help forensic scientists wishing to know more about the race of a suspect.

...reasonably predict "race", just like how the characterization of the aforementioned "Nubian" and Spanish crania exemplified.

Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Rasol
quote:

And now you sound frustrated.

Why would that be?

Perhaps because you have no scientific basis for your racial ideology.

So....you are reduced to scouring the internet seeking anything faintly resembling 'support'.

You find none.

So the best you can do is distort the works of real scholars who do not agree with you.

You do the same thing with your language work.

Seems a tad obsessve, no?

Disagree?


Yes I disagree. The article makes it clear that races exist.

Article
quote:

In contrast to other classes of human genetic variation, the population genetics of copy number variation remains unexplored. The distribution of copy number variation within and among different populations is shaped by mutation, selection and demographic history. A range of polymorphisms, including SNPs25, microsatellites59 and Alu insertion variants60, has been used to investigate population structure. To demonstrate the utility of copy number variation genotypes for population genetic inference we performed population clustering61 on 67 genotyped biallelic CNVs. We obtained the optimal clustering with the assumption of three ancestral populations, with the African, European and Asian populations clearly differentiated (Fig. 7). Population differentiation of individual variants is commonly estimated by the statistic FST, which varies from 0 (undifferentiated) to 1 (population-specific)62. The average FST for the same 67 autosomal CNVs was 0.11, very similar to that observed for all autosomal Phase I HapMap SNPs (0.13)25.

Recent population-specific positive selection elevates population differentiation. To explore population differentiation at all CNVs, we devised a statistic, VST, that estimates population differentiation based on the quantitative intensity data and varies from 0 to 1, similar to FST (Supplementary Fig. 16). Estimating VST for all clones on the WGTP array and all CNVs on the 500K EA array revealed a number of outliers with levels of population differentiation suggestive of population-specific selective pressures (Fig. 8; see also Supplementary Table 20). Among these outliers were two CNVs previously demonstrated to have elevated population differentiation7, 19: UGT2B17 is a gene encoding a UDP-glucuronosyl transferase with roles in androgen metabolism and xenobiotic conjugation63, 64, and CCL3L1 is a chemokine-encoding multi-copy gene at which greater copy numbers protect against HIV-1 infection19.



This is the claim of geneticists from 13 leading research institutions. Are you saying these learned professionals are wrong while you and your friends on this forum are right?

quote:



http://tinyurl. com/yh7kp2


There are just under 30,000 genes in the human genome, which consists of about 3 billion "letters" of the DNA code. The scientists found that more than 10 per cent of these genes appear to be multiplied in the 270 people who took part in the study. They do not know why some genes are copied and some are not. One gene, called CCL3L1, which is copied many times in people of African descent, appears to confer resistance to HIV. Another gene involved in making a blood protein is copied many times in people from south-east Asia and seems to help against malaria. Other research has shown that variation in the number of copies of some genes is involved in Alzheimer's and Parkinson's disease.

Are there any other practical applications?

The scientists looked at people from three broad racial groups - African, Asian and European. Although there was an underlying similarity in terms of how common it was for genes to be copied, there were enough racial differences to assign every person bar one to their correct ethnic origin. This might help forensic scientists wishing to know more about the race of a suspect.

Who made the discovery and where can we read more about it?

Scientists from 13 research centres were involved, including Britain's Sanger Institute in Cambridge, which also took a lead role in deciphering the human genome. The research is published in Nature, Nature Genetics and Genome Research.


The evidence is clear. It is you, not I, that lives in a world of fantasy.


.

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Supercar
Member
Member # 6477

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Supercar         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:

This is the claim of geneticists from 13 leading research institutions. Are you saying these learned professionals are wrong while you and your friends on this forum are right?

We are saying that you are arriving at the wrong conclusions from the study. It is not the study that is the problem at hand; it is how you are interpreting it to support the highly biologically-questionable idea of human "races".
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Supercar
quote:

We are saying that you are arriving at the wrong conclusions from the study. It is not the study that is the problem at hand; it is how you are interpreting it to support the highly biologically-questionable idea of human "races".

This is not my conclusion. It was the conclusion of the researchers who discussed their findings in the article below. Are you saying that the authors of the article below are misquoting the scientists from the 13 leading genetic institutions who claim that races exist.

quote:



http://tinyurl. com/yh7kp2


There are just under 30,000 genes in the human genome, which consists of about 3 billion "letters" of the DNA code. The scientists found that more than 10 per cent of these genes appear to be multiplied in the 270 people who took part in the study. They do not know why some genes are copied and some are not. One gene, called CCL3L1, which is copied many times in people of African descent, appears to confer resistance to HIV. Another gene involved in making a blood protein is copied many times in people from south-east Asia and seems to help against malaria. Other research has shown that variation in the number of copies of some genes is involved in Alzheimer's and Parkinson's disease.

Are there any other practical applications?

The scientists looked at people from three broad racial groups - African, Asian and European. Although there was an underlying similarity in terms of how common it was for genes to be copied, there were enough racial differences to assign every person bar one to their correct ethnic origin. This might help forensic scientists wishing to know more about the race of a suspect.

Who made the discovery and where can we read more about it?

Scientists from 13 research centres were involved, including Britain's Sanger Institute in Cambridge, which also took a lead role in deciphering the human genome. The research is published in Nature, Nature Genetics and Genome Research.



Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rasol
Member
Member # 4592

Icon 1 posted      Profile for rasol     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
This is not my conclusion.

Incorrect.

The title of your thread, "Race Exist" is your conclusion, not a conclusion of a scientific study.

This is distinct from variations in copies of genes, which is the subject of the study.

Unfortunately, appending your far fetched opinions to the work of those who disagree with you is standard behavior from you.

It's very silly, which is why you pepper your thread with disingenuous grins. [Big Grin]

When you do this, you sell yourself short, and make it easy for others to dismiss you.

Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Supercar
Member
Member # 6477

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Supercar         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:

This is not my conclusion. It was the conclusion of the researchers who discussed their findings in the article below. Are you saying that the authors of the article below are misquoting the scientists from the 13 leading genetic institutions who claim that races exist.

I am saying that 'you' are misreading the article. For instance, what have you learnt from the study, in terms of the genes under study:

[*] Is the variation in the alleles or the number of copies?

[*]Does the answer to the above support your idea of human "races"?

[*]Can the said alleles be inherited via miscegenation between people of 'different' ethnic background? If so, how then do you 'predict' the ethnic background of the offspring from such coupling?

^^I asked you earlier questions along these lines earlier, but of course, you never replied:

quote:
Supercar:

Clyde at it again, defending the biologically indefensible idea of human "races", and in doing so, grasping onto the idea that the number of "copies" of a gene marks "racial" difference. Meanwhile, things like this were overlooked...

there was an underlying similarity in terms of how common it was for genes to be copied,...

They do not know why some genes are copied and some are not.


I wonder in what "race" would a European who, in recent history of the family tree, had an African ancestry, but wouldn't be 'physically' out of place with other 'white' Europeans, happened to inherit the 'number' of said genes from that African ancestor, be placed?...just as southern Europe has higher incidence of the Benin haplotype HbS.

For instance, if this were the case in the twins shown: here

Posted here: Clyde Winters, you still believe biological race exists?

^^Maybe you'll surprise me, and now answer "all" the questions herein, as they are specifically laid out.

Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rasol
Member
Member # 4592

Icon 1 posted      Profile for rasol     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
They do not know why some genes are copied and some are not. One gene, called CCL3L1, which is copied many times in people of African descent, appears to confer resistance to HIV.
Yet millions of Africans have died of HIV. Genes confering resistence to disease are likely and adaptive response. Where there is little HIV, in Africa, this gene would confer no advantage and so would not be selected for. This doesn't prove race, or even that Africans are statisically less likely to get HIV. It only proves tha HIV or similar disease has killed enough people in Africa to cause and adaptive response.

It's rather pathetic that you highlight this passage because you think it somehow 'proves' race.

quote:
Another gene involved in making a blood protein is copied many times in people from south-east Asia and seems to help against malaria.
Yet millions of South-East Asians die of Malaria.

Moreover the precense of this adaptive response distinguishes South-East Asians from NorthEast Asians or North American Indians, for the simple reason that there is little to no Malaria in the later two regions - yet in Doctor Winters race typology - *all these people belong to the 'same [mongoloid] race'.*

In fact, the precense of different gene frequencies in South-East Asians and North East Asians contradicts your simplistic notion that these people can be placed in *the same race*.

It's also important for medicine as it means you can't put all Asians in the same medical catagory and make assumptions about them.

So desparate is Winters for evidence, that he does not even notice this contradiction in *his* race thesis.

Now that we have made him aware of it, would Winters care to explain it?

Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
^^
I am not desparate for evidence I am just telling the truth. You attempt to lie to your followers on this forum and maintain that race does not exist biologically when scientists continue to show that it does.

I don't have to make-up this reality it is evident in the news. This new study showing that race exist was published in three different journals, and is the lead story in many newspapers around the world.

The only people who can continue to maintain the notion that races do not exist, given the prestige of the authors of this article are people who personally choose to live in a dream world. Do you really believe that scientists would allow a newspaper to make up untruths and publish them as true. No way. These scientists are claiming what we always knew. Race(s) exist biologically.

You act as though we live in some double speak world, where we ignore what is said and shown and only see what we want to believe.

You are just unhappy that geneticists continue to play the race card when you have attempted to claim race no longer exist.

Race will always exist biologically and socially as long as man exist, no matter what blinders you wear.

Some anthropologists dislike the notion of race because it affects the status quo. If you accept that races exist, then you have to accept that civilization was founded by Blacks, since the skeletal, and other evidence supports the view that the Egyptians, Harappans,Elamites, Xia (of China) and Sumerians were all genetically related to Black Africans as is their languages. Acceptance of this truth means that all that we have been taught to believe as history is a lie.

Diop, DuBois and others have always maintained that races exist because they knew that if you are going to truely show the great history of Blacks you have to look at the characteristics that distinguish us. It is these racial features that allow us to truely discuss the great history of Blacks.If it was not for the skeletal record of ancient Egypt would not be able to claim that the Egyptians were Black Africans, instead of Asians.

Your continued support of the idea that races do not exist biologically (while maintaining that Egyptians are Black Africans which in itself is use of race in the dertermination of the ethnic origin of the ancient Egyptian people) support the Eurocentrists and status quo who seek to deny any role of Blacks in history. You are just to blind to see. Your adherence to the idea that races don't exist helps Eurocentrists maintain the status quo not spread the truth.

.

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rasol
Member
Member # 4592

Icon 1 posted      Profile for rasol     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
^ Booooooooo. [Frown]

- off topic blow hard rhetoric, spam ranting and noise making...sure signs of your desparation Dr. Winters.

What you need to do instead is answer the question....
quote:

Another gene involved in making a blood protein is copied many times in people from south-east Asia and seems to help against malaria.

Originally posted by rasol:

In fact, the precense of additional copies of this gene in South-East Asians but *not* North East Asians, Africans or Europeans *contradicts* your simplistic notion that all East Asians can placed in the same race based on gene frequency.

So desparate is Winters for evidence, that he does not even notice this contradiction in *his* race thesis.

Now that we have made him aware of it, would Winters care to explain it?

If you can't answer this question, then you effectively admit that you are simply distorting and your thesis is nonsense.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
^There is no need for me to answer this question.
I didn't conduct the study and determine that race exist. It was geneticists with years of experience from the 13 leading genetic research institutions in the world that made this claim.

If you find fault with the study that's okay. Write a letter to the journals where the article appeared and point out that the researchers who wrote this article is wrong. But please cite in your response the data from your OWN LAB, that contradicts their findings. I am sure they will want to see this evidence. By the way, before you send these journals your research findings that contradict the study herein discussed, why don't you post the findings from your own experimental research here for all of us to read.

Lacking any research of your own in this area: Send a post to the authors of the forementioned article. They will probably be happy to answer your question since they did the research.

.

--------------------
C. A. Winters

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rasol
Member
Member # 4592

Icon 1 posted      Profile for rasol     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
There is no need for me to answer this question.
The need to answer the question is simply a function of civil discourse, since I asked it.

The question is basic to comprehension of population genetics.

If you can't answer the question then it indicates that you don't actually understand the article you reference.

If you can answer, but simply refuse to, then this indicates that you are not interested in discourse, but rather only interested in propaganda trolling and noisemaking.

quote:
If you find fault with the study that's okay.
We find fault with your distortions and inability to answer our questions.... pertaining to the article you cited, in the thread you started.

Is that... okay? [Roll Eyes]

Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Arwa
Member
Member # 11172

Rate Member
Icon 2 posted      Profile for Arwa     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Dear Dr.Clyde Winters,

I read the article (Nature) you provided, and let me say first, that I welcome such studies, because it only strength that race does not exist in Science.
Sure, they claims that such studies would help to produce medicine which target better for that person.
But eventually, if you want to prove race in science, then you need at the end DNA sekvense and gene.

The article does not claim that there is a gene that code for a race. The article deals with population genetics, which is quite different than what the title on this thread says. A lot of things what we think is race, is actually environment. Surely you agree with me that allelic frequencies vary between any selected group? Then what is the point to talk about race in science?

One of the methods the article used is single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) I'm not an expert on this subject, but let me give you this article:

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=0002A353-C027-1E1C-8B3B809EC588EEDF&pageNumber=2&catID=2

ps.
You'll find racists in every milieu

Peace!

Posts: 2198 | Registered: Jun 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Arwa
Member
Member # 11172

Rate Member
Icon 4 posted      Profile for Arwa     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
A very important article!!!!!!!!

Science 18 February 2005:
Vol. 307. no. 5712, pp. 1050 - 1051


quote:
MEDICINE:
Enhanced: Race and Reification in Science
Troy Duster[HN12]*

Alfred North Whitehead warned many years ago about "the fallacy of misplaced concreteness" [HN1] (1), by which he meant the tendency to assume that categories of thought coincide with the obdurate character of the empirical world. If we think of a shoe as "really a shoe," then we are not likely to use it as a hammer (when no hammer is around). Whitehead's insight about misplaced concreteness is also known as the fallacy of reification [HN2]. Recent research in medicine and genetics makes it even more crucial to resist actively the temptation to deploy racial categories as if immutable in nature and society.

Hypertension and Heart Disease
In the last two decades, there has been extensive publication on the differences in hypertension and heart disease between Americans of European descent and Americans of African descent (2-4). Racial designations are frequently used in efforts to assess the respective influences of environmental and genetic factors.

In November, a study was published regarding a combination of isosorbide dinitrate and hydralazine (BiDil) [HN3] that was originally found to be ineffective in treating heart disease in the general population but was then shown to work in a 3-year trial of a group of 1050 individuals designated as African Americans (5). BiDil is likely to get FDA approval this year and has been labeled "the first ethnic drug," although in medical practice, this becomes "the first racial drug." In presenting their justification for FDA approval of an ethnic/race-specific drug, the company (NitroMed) [HN4] announced, "The African American community is affected at a greater rate by heart failure than that of the corresponding Caucasian population. African Americans between the ages of 45 and 64 are 2.5 times more likely to die from heart failure than Caucasians in the same age range" (6).

However, both age and survey population complicate this picture. The age group 45 to 64 only accounts for about 6% of heart failure mortality, and for those over 65, the statistical differences between "African Americans and Caucasians" nearly completely disappear (7). Researchers recently published a study that was explicitly designed to compare racial differences, by sampling whites from eight surveys completed in Europe, the United States, and Canada and contrasting these results with those of a sample of three surveys among blacks from Africa, the Caribbean, and the United States (8). Hypertension rates were measured in 85,000 subjects. The data from Brazil, Trinidad, and Cuba show a significantly smaller racial disparity in blood pressure than is found in North America (8).[HN5]

Even within the category African American, the highly variable phenotype of skin color complicates the hypertension and race thesis. A classic epidemiological study on the topic also found differences within the African American population--with darker-skinned blacks generally having higher mean blood pressure than lighter-skinned blacks. The authors concluded that it was not the color of the skin that produced a direct causal outcome in hypertension, but that darker skin color in the United States is associated with less access to scarce and valued resources of the society. There is a complex feedback loop and interaction effect between phenotype and social practices related to that phenotype (4, 9).

Others have voiced concerns about the pitfalls of using race as anything but a temporary proxy: As the geneticist David Goldstein [HN6] observed, "Race for prescription is only an interim solution to carry us through a period of ignorance until we find the underlying causes" (10). There is every evidence that these underlying causes interact with each other. However, race is such a dominant category in the cognitive field that the "interim solution" can leave its own indelible mark once given even the temporary imprimatur of scientific legitimacy by molecular genetics.

Studies of Human Genetic Diversity
The procedures for answering any inquiry into the empirical world determine the scientific legitimacy of claims to validity and reliable knowledge, but the prior question will always be: Why that particular question? The first principle of knowledge construction is, therefore, which question gets asked in the research enterprise.

A paper published in this week's issue of Science [HN7] (11) is well-intentioned, well-crafted, and designed to help better understand the molecular basis of disease. The researchers were searching for and found patterns of SNPs [HN8] differentially distributed in three population groups, formed from a total of 71 persons who were Americans of African, European, or Han Chinese descent.

Why was the question raised in this manner? The answer is a scientific Catch-22. This and other similar efforts (12) to create linkage disequilibrium and haplotype maps have a logic for choosing to study people from disparate geographic regions of the world. The purpose is to generate maps that can indicate subtle differences in the patterning or structuring of human genetic diversity across the globe. [HN9] An increased understanding of these patterns of genetic diversity will help scientists doing gene-association studies by identifying new variants and reducing the likelihood of false-positive associations. The hope is that it may aid scientists to identify medically relevant genes for diseases

However, the particular groups of individuals chosen to represent each region of the world are often chosen because of their convenience and accessibility. Cell and tissue repositories are created to decrease the cost and difficulty of obtaining samples, and the archived samples will be extensively characterized and frequently utilized. Sample collections from repositories may be treated as populations in the narrow sense of the term, even when there is little evidence that they represent a geographically localized, reproductively isolated group. These samples are often subtly portrayed as representing racially categorized populations. Finding a higher frequency of some alleles in one population versus another is a guaranteed outcome of modern technology, even for two randomly chosen populations. When the boundaries of those populations coincide with the social definition of race, a delicate tightrope needs to be better navigated between: (i) acknowledging race as a stratifying practice in societies that can lead to different frequencies of alleles in different modern populations but also to different access to health-related resources, and (ii) reifying race as having genetically sufficiently distinctive features, i.e., with "distinctive gene pathways," which are used to explain health disparities between racially categorized populations.

If we fall into the trap of accepting the categories of stored data sets, then it can be an easy slide down the slope to the misconceptions of "black" or "white" diseases. By accepting the prefabricated racial designations of stored samples and then reporting patterns of differences in SNPs between those categories, misplaced genetic concreteness is nearly inevitable.

SNP Patterns and Searches for a Biological Basis for Criminal Behavior
Several countries now have national DNA databases (13). [HN10] Although I use the U.S. criminal justice system as an example, I have no doubt that the principles being considered are universal ones.

It is now relatively common for scholars to acknowledge the considerable and documented racial and ethnic bias in the criminal justice system, from police procedures, prosecutorial discretion, jury selection, and sentencing practices--of which racial profiling is but the tip of an iceberg (14-16). If the FBI's DNA database is primarily composed of those who have been touched by the criminal justice system and that system has engaged in practices that routinely select more from one group, there will be an obvious skew or bias toward this group in this database.

If we turn the clock back just 60 years, whites constituted about 77% of all prisoners in America, while blacks were only 22% (17). In just six decades, the incarceration rate of African Americans in relation to whites has gone up in a striking manner. In 1933, blacks were incarcerated at a rate about three times that of whites (18). In 1950, the ratio had increased to about four times; in 1970, it was six times; and in 1990, it was seven times that of whites.

Among humans, gene pools and SNP patterns cannot change much in 60 years, but economic conditions and the practices of the criminal justice system demonstrably do. The comparative explanatory power of SNP patterns surely pales before the analytic utility of examining shifting institutional practices and economic conditions. However, given the body of "ethnic-estimation" research being published on behalf of forensic applications (19, 20) and the exponential growth of national DNA databases (21, 22), it is not at all unreasonable to expect that a project that proposed to search for SNP profiles among sex offenders and felons convicted of violent crimes would meet with some success, both for funding and for finding "something." This could begin with the phenotype of "three populations," as in the study cited above (11), because that is the way these data are collected by the FBI and the contributing states. We must maintain vigilance to prevent SNP profiling from providing the thin veneer of neutral scientific investigation, while reinscribing the racial taxonomies of already collected data. [HN11]

Conclusions
As I have tried to show, a set of assumptions about race has animated the development of BiDil, genetic diversity analyses, "ethnic estimation" research, and the siren's call to do SNP research on the ever-expanding databases of DNA from the incarcerated. These elements are poised to exert a cascading effect--reinscribing taxonomies of race across a broad range of scientific practices and fields. Biomedical research must resist setting off the cascade and, while still moving forward in their efforts to identify the molecular correlates of disease, climb back on the tightrope to address racial disparities in health, in all their biosocial complexity.

The ability to use genomic knowledge to deliver effective pharmaceuticals more safely to special subpopulations that have some functional genetic markers holds promise. Thus, if the FDA approves BiDil, it should do so only under the condition that further research be conducted to find the markers that have the actual functional association with drug responsiveness--thus assuring that the drug be approved for everyone with those markers, regardless of their ancestry, or even of their ancestral informative markers.

The technology will be increasingly available to provide SNP profiles of populations. When the phenotype distinguishing these populations is race, the likelihood of committing the fallacy of misplaced concreteness, in science, is nearly overwhelming. For this reason, when geneticists report population data, they should always attach a caveat or warning label that could read something like this, "allelic frequencies vary between any selected human groups--to assume that those variations reflect 'racial categories' is unwarranted." Whereas this will not completely block the tendency to reify race, it will be an appropriately cautious intervention that tries to prevent science from unwittingly joining the current march toward a biological reinscription of the concept.


Posts: 2198 | Registered: Jun 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Great post Arwa.

Arwa
quote:



If we fall into the trap of accepting the categories of stored data sets, then it can be an easy slide down the slope to the misconceptions of "black" or "white" diseases. By accepting the prefabricated racial designations of stored samples and then reporting patterns of differences in SNPs between those categories, misplaced genetic concreteness is nearly inevitable.


The technology will be increasingly available to provide SNP profiles of populations. When the phenotype distinguishing these populations is race, the likelihood of committing the fallacy of misplaced concreteness, in science, is nearly overwhelming. For this reason, when geneticists report population data, they should always attach a caveat or warning label that could read something like this, "allelic frequencies vary between any selected human groups--to assume that those variations reflect 'racial categories' is unwarranted." Whereas this will not completely block the tendency to reify race, it will be an appropriately cautious intervention that tries to prevent science from unwittingly joining the current march toward a biological reinscription of the concept.


This is fine rhectoric, but when you find 13 of the leading institutions in the world that study genetics claiming race exist it is hard to ignore their research. Again, as I stated earlier it is idealistic to believe that race is not reality in biology. These researchers did not try to avoid bringing in the race card.

Everyday it is becoming increasingly clear that while some medicines are effective accross populations, many medicines are more effective for one population and not another. This makes it clear that race as a concept has merit and is a biological reality as noted by the authors of the study under discussion.

Again great post Arwa it does show how environment can influence health, but it fails to counter the evidence that race has a biological reality.

.

--------------------
C. A. Winters

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Elijah The Tishbite
Member
Member # 10328

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Elijah The Tishbite     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
This is fine rhectoric, but when you find 13 of the leading institutions in the world that study genetics claiming race exist it is hard to ignore their research. Again, as I stated earlier it is idealistic to believe that race is not reality in biology. These researchers did not try to avoid bringing in the race card.

The study you keep talking about never proved nor said biological race exists, please the post the reference and citation by one of the 13 \"leading scientists. This is just a weak appeal to authority fallacy.

quote:
Everyday it is becoming increasingly clear that while some medicines are effective accross populations, many medicines are more effective for one population and not another. This makes it clear that race as a concept has merit and is a biological reality as noted by the authors of the study under discussion.
Nonsense, African Americans are at higher risks for certain diseases not because of our \"biological race\", its because of lack of access to proper health care and the way we eat nd diet, its has nothing to do with anything biologically construed as \"race\"

quote:
Again great post Arwa it does show how environment can influence health, but it fails to counter the evidence that race has a biological reality.


The article certainly did not help your argument that biological race exists, it goes against you Clyde, come on now.
Posts: 2595 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rasol
Member
Member # 4592

Icon 1 posted      Profile for rasol     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
This is fine rhetoric
Certainly it is was better than your sloppy rhetoric.

quote:
but when you find 13 of the leading institutions in the world that study genetics claiming race exit
Each time you repeat your lie, it becomes more overblown, more patently ludicrous.

It's a mistake to repeat and conflate lies the way you do.

In the long run, it only illustrates that you have no desire to be taken seriously.

This undermines you in our eyes when you present your linguistic theories, since we are ever cogniscent of your tendency to simply - flat out lie - when it suits your purposes.

quote:
Everyday it is becoming increasingly clear
.....that you can't answer our questions because you don't understand the articles you cite. So you lie in order to compensate.

Isn't that a fair assessment?

How then can you hope to pretend to 'interpret' said studies? You can't. That's why no-one is impressed by your slop.

Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
SEEKING
Member
Member # 10105

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for SEEKING     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Dr. Winters, I am truly disappointed in you.

You have posted this article on a different site and the explanation given are of similar content as being expressed here.

Surely you're not going to go through the rest of your life spreading the same tales when in fact the evidence doesn't support your case just because of your wishful thinking that biological race does exist??

Posts: 391 | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I will continue to write that race exist as long as people on this forum insist that the Egyptians were Black Africans. To insist that the Egyptians were Black means that you also believe that races exist.

.

--------------------
C. A. Winters

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Elijah The Tishbite
Member
Member # 10328

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Elijah The Tishbite     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
I will continue to write that race exist as long as people on this forum insist that the Egyptians were Black Africans. To insist that the Egyptians were Black means that you also believe that races exist.

.

LOL, come on now Clyde, since you could not prove that the said 13 authors proved race exists you're going to use this to prove your argument? Black refers to skin color, not race.
Posts: 2595 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rasol
Member
Member # 4592

Icon 1 posted      Profile for rasol     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
I will continue to write that race exist
lol. Exactly. "YOU" will write this, and we will disregard your writings because you can't answer even the most basic questions pertaining to your racialist dogma. [Smile]
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
X-Ras
quote:

LOL, come on now Clyde, since you could not prove that the said 13 authors proved race exists you're going to use this to prove your argument? Black refers to skin color, not race.


Ha,Ha. Thanks for the joke. How can you tell the skin color of a skeleton on color of a person from his genes unless you are using the term Black or white to refer to a race. As a result, when people use the term Black African to refer to Egyptians they are using the term "Black" to designate a racial group just like the authors of the study under discussion.

.

What are you talking about I confirmed that the authors determined races biologically:

quote:



http://tinyurl. com/yh7kp2


There are just under 30,000 genes in the human genome, which consists of about 3 billion "letters" of the DNA code. The scientists found that more than 10 per cent of these genes appear to be multiplied in the 270 people who took part in the study. They do not know why some genes are copied and some are not. One gene, called CCL3L1, which is copied many times in people of African descent, appears to confer resistance to HIV. Another gene involved in making a blood protein is copied many times in people from south-east Asia and seems to help against malaria. Other research has shown that variation in the number of copies of some genes is involved in Alzheimer's and Parkinson's disease.

Are there any other practical applications?

The scientists looked at people from three broad racial groups - African, Asian and European. Although there was an underlying similarity in terms of how common it was for genes to be copied, there were enough racial differences to assign every person bar one to their correct ethnic origin. This might help forensic scientists wishing to know more about the race of a suspect.

Who made the discovery and where can we read more about it?

Scientists from 13 research centres were involved, including Britain's Sanger Institute in Cambridge, which also took a lead role in deciphering the human genome. The research is published in Nature, Nature Genetics and Genome Research.




Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rasol
Member
Member # 4592

Icon 1 posted      Profile for rasol     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
^ Spamming only shows your sour grapes and spoiled sport tendencies DR. Winters.

Especially since you fail time and again to answer our questions.

This is the same ad nauseum fallacy approach you use in linguistic threads when you fail to relate the Mande of West Africa to the Manderin of China. [Roll Eyes]

This is why everyone is so disappointed and unimpressed with you.

You should reconsider your strategy.

quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
To insist that the Egyptians were Black means that you also believe that races exist.

For this statement to be true you would have to prove that skin color relates race.

Here is what scientist Nina Jablonsky says about this topic:

Skin coloration in humans is adaptive and labile. Skin pigmentation levels have changed more than once in human evolution. Because of this, skin coloration is of no value in determining phylogenetic relationships among modern human groups.

Note: This is and actual quote from a scientist.
http://www.calacademy.org/research/anthropology/Jablonski/skin_evol.html

Constrast with your bad habit of trying to pin your views on others via distortion.

Can you produce a statement from and anthropologist pertaining to skin color contradicting Jablonsky?

I'm sorry Dr. Winters, but you've yet to produce any evidence in support of your ideology.

Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Rasol
quote:



Skin coloration in humans is adaptive and labile. Skin pigmentation levels have changed more than once in human evolution. Because of this, skin coloration is of no value in determining phylogenetic relationships among modern human groups.



You should tell this to X-Ras. I use Black/African as a racial term like the authors of the study under discussion. Just like we say White South Africans to refer to the Europeans in South Africa.

quote:



http://tinyurl. com/yh7kp2


There are just under 30,000 genes in the human genome, which consists of about 3 billion "letters" of the DNA code. The scientists found that more than 10 per cent of these genes appear to be multiplied in the 270 people who took part in the study. They do not know why some genes are copied and some are not. One gene, called CCL3L1, which is copied many times in people of African descent, appears to confer resistance to HIV. Another gene involved in making a blood protein is copied many times in people from south-east Asia and seems to help against malaria. Other research has shown that variation in the number of copies of some genes is involved in Alzheimer's and Parkinson's disease.

Are there any other practical applications?

The scientists looked at people from three broad racial groups - African, Asian and European. Although there was an underlying similarity in terms of how common it was for genes to be copied, there were enough racial differences to assign every person bar one to their correct ethnic origin. This might help forensic scientists wishing to know more about the race of a suspect.

Who made the discovery and where can we read more about it?

Scientists from 13 research centres were involved, including Britain's Sanger Institute in Cambridge, which also took a lead role in deciphering the human genome. The research is published in Nature, Nature Genetics and Genome Research.




.

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rasol
Member
Member # 4592

Icon 1 posted      Profile for rasol     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
How can you tell the skin color of a skeleton on color of a person from his genes?
Genetically -

Skin color is produced by a melanocortin receptor, which can be assessed genetically, but is not racial.

Morphologically -

Skin color is a form of tropical adaptation which can also be correlated to tropical skeletal adaptation which is also not racial.

Now we've answered your question.

Where are the answers to ours?

Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rasol
Member
Member # 4592

Icon 1 posted      Profile for rasol     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
I use Black/African as a racial term
I don't.

quote:
like the authors of the study under discussion
tsk tsk, yet another lie from Dr. Winters.

The term Black African is not used in the study at all, nor is it stated in the study that Black African is racial catagory so you make no point here either - except that you are quite the 'casual liar' Dr. Winters.

Meanwhile our questions go unanswered while you continue to humiliate yourself with lies.

Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Rasol
quote:

quote:I use Black/African as a racial term

I don't.


That's your right. But if you notice your geneticists friends have no difficulty using it as a racial term.


quote:



http://tinyurl. com/yh7kp2


There are just under 30,000 genes in the human genome, which consists of about 3 billion "letters" of the DNA code. The scientists found that more than 10 per cent of these genes appear to be multiplied in the 270 people who took part in the study. They do not know why some genes are copied and some are not. One gene, called CCL3L1, which is copied many times in people of African descent, appears to confer resistance to HIV. Another gene involved in making a blood protein is copied many times in people from south-east Asia and seems to help against malaria. Other research has shown that variation in the number of copies of some genes is involved in Alzheimer's and Parkinson's disease.

Are there any other practical applications?

The scientists looked at people from three broad racial groups - African, Asian and European. Although there was an underlying similarity in terms of how common it was for genes to be copied, there were enough racial differences to assign every person bar one to their correct ethnic origin. This might help forensic scientists wishing to know more about the race of a suspect.

Who made the discovery and where can we read more about it?

Scientists from 13 research centres were involved, including Britain's Sanger Institute in Cambridge, which also took a lead role in deciphering the human genome. The research is published in Nature, Nature Genetics and Genome Research.




.

.

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rasol
Member
Member # 4592

Icon 1 posted      Profile for rasol     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
rasol writes: For this statement to be true you would have to prove that skin color relates race.
quote:
Winters writes: But if you notice your geneticists friends have no difficulty using it as a racial term.
I noticed four things.

1) Blacks are not referenced in the study at all.

2) Black is not referenced in the article you keep spamming.

3) You are so busy spamming in desparation that you don't even notice that your far fetched claims are nowhere mentioned in your spam.

and...

4) You still have not answered my question:

Here is what scientist Nina Jablonsky says about this topic:

Skin coloration in humans is adaptive and labile. Skin pigmentation levels have changed more than once in human evolution. Because of this, skin coloration is of no value in determining phylogenetic relationships among modern human groups.


Where is your evidence that skin color is racial?

We know it isn't in the article you keep spamming, which makes no mention of skin color or Blacks.

Spamming doesn't help you Dr. Winters, it just makes you look like a frustrated fool.

Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Arwa
Member
Member # 11172

Rate Member
Icon 4 posted      Profile for Arwa     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Dear Dr.Clyde Winters,

These 13 centres presented a set of allele frequenc that varies in different groups. And they never claimed that there exsist race, because the policy of Nature would never allow to publish in their paper.

quote:
Nature Genetics now obliges authors to "explain why they make use of particular ethnic groups or populations, and how classification was achieved." N. Engl. J. Med. 344, 1392#8722;1393 (2001)
These studies are the same when we talk about sickle cell anaemia. You will have a population who have higher frequency than other groups.

Dr.Clyde Winters,

If race exists in science, then why is there no disease founded in only one "race"?

Whith all due respect Dr.Clyde Winters, your basis knowledge in genetic is very minimal.
The article in Nature proofs that allelic frequencies vary between any selected group, hence! There is NO RACE IN SCIENCE.

Finally:
Race is a social construct, not a scientific classification

Peace
Yours, Arwa

Posts: 2198 | Registered: Jun 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Elijah The Tishbite
Member
Member # 10328

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Elijah The Tishbite     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Arwa:
Dear Dr.Clyde Winters,

These 13 centres presented a set of allele frequenc that varies in different groups. And they never claimed that there exsist race, because the policy of Nature would never allow to publish in their paper.

quote:
Nature Genetics now obliges authors to "explain why they make use of particular ethnic groups or populations, and how classification was achieved." N. Engl. J. Med. 344, 1392#8722;1393 (2001)
These studies are the same when we talk about sickle cell anaemia. You will have a population who have higher frequency than other groups.

Dr.Clyde Winters,

If race exists in science, then why is there no disease founded in only one "race"?

Whith all due respect Dr.Clyde Winters, your basis knowledge in genetic is very minimal.
The article in Nature proofs that allelic frequencies vary between any selected group, hence! There is NO RACE IN SCIENCE.

Finally:
Race is a social construct, not a scientific classification

Peace
Yours, Arwa

Good Post Arwa, but Dr Winters isn't going to get it. He has to learn that one cannot misuse a study to prove something that wasn't proven in the said study.
Posts: 2595 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Arwa
Member
Member # 11172

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Arwa     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I think Dr.Clyde Winters enjoys playing around with us. If race exist in science, then we would know the gene that codes "race".
Posts: 2198 | Registered: Jun 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rasol
Member
Member # 4592

Icon 1 posted      Profile for rasol     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
he has to learn that one cannot misuse a study to prove something that wasn't proven in the said study.
He's not a very good tactician either.

He is a professional linguist not a geneticist but his penchant for blatant bogusness comes back to bite him during linguistic discussions.

He is demonstrating a generic disregard for the truth which makes him unreliable regardless of the discipline under discussion.

Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Arwa
Member
Member # 11172

Rate Member
Icon 3 posted      Profile for Arwa     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Dr.Clyde Winters,

Here is an article, originally from The Independent, UK, related the article from Nature.

quote:
Genetic breakthrough that reveals the differences between humans
Scientists hail genetic discovery that will change human understanding

23 November 2006

Scientists have discovered a dramatic variation in the genetic make-up of humans that could lead to a fundamental reappraisal of what causes incurable diseases and could provide a greater understanding of mankind.

The discovery has astonished scientists studying the human genome - the genetic recipe of man. Until now it was believed the variation between people was due largely to differences in the sequences of the individual "letters" of the genome.

It now appears much of the variation is explained instead by people having multiple copies of some key genes that make up the human genome.

Until now it was assumed that the human genome, or "book of life", is largely the same for everyone, save for a few spelling differences in some of the words. Instead, the findings suggest that the book contains entire sentences, paragraphs or even whole pages that are repeated any number of times.

The findings mean that instead of humanity being 99.9 per cent identical, as previously believed, we are at least 10 times more different between one another than once thought - which could explain why some people are prone to serious diseases.

The studies published today have found that instead of having just two copies of each gene - one from each parent - people can carry many copies, but just how many can vary between one person and the next.

The studies suggest variations in the number of copies of genes is normal and healthy. But the scientists also believe many diseases may be triggered by an abnormal loss or gain in the copies of some key genes.

Another implication of the finding is that we are more different to our closest living relative, the chimpanzee, than previously assumed from earlier studies. Instead of being 99 per cent similar, we are more likely to be about 96 per cent similar.

The findings, published simultaneously in three leading science journals by scientists from 13 different research centres in Britain and America, were described as ground-breaking by leading scientists.

"I believe this research will change for ever the field of human genetics," said Professor James Lupski, a world authority on medical genetics at the Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, Texas.

Professor Lupski said the findings superseded the basic principles of human genetics that have been built up since the days of Gregor Mendel, the 19th century "father" of Mendelian genetics, and of Jim Watson and Francis Crick, who discovered the DNA double helix in 1953.

"One can no longer consider human traits as resulting primarily from [simple DNA] changes... With all respect to Watson and Crick, many Mendelian and complex traits, as well as sporadic diseases, may indeed result from structural variation of the genome," Professor Lupski said.

Deciphering the three billion letters in the sequence of the human genome was once likened to landing on the Moon. Having now arrived, scientists have found the "lunar landscape" of the genome is very different from what they expected.

Matthew Hurles, one of the project's leaders at the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute in Cambridge, said the findings show each one of us has a unique pattern of gains and losses of entire sections of our DNA.

"One of the real surprises of these results was just how much of our DNA varies in copy number. We estimate this to be at least 12 per cent of the genome - that has never been shown before," Dr Hurles said.

Scientists have detected variation in the "copy number" of genes in some individuals before but the sheer scale of the variation now being discovered is dramatic.

"The copy number variation that researchers had seen before was simply the tip of the iceberg, while the bulk lay submerged, undetected," Dr Hurles said.

"We now appreciate the immense contribution of this phenomenon to genetic differences between individuals," he said.

The studies involved a detailed and sophisticated analysis of the genomes of 270 people with Asian, African or European ancestry. It was important to include as wide a sample of the human gene pool as possible.

They found that 2,900 genes could vary in the number of copies possessed by the individuals. The genes involved multiple copies of stretches of DNA up to a million letters of the genetic code long.

"We used to think that if you had big changes like this, then they must be involved in disease. But we are showing that we can all have these changes," said Stephen Scherer of the Howard Hughes Medical Institute in Chevy Chase, Maryland.

But it is also becoming apparent that many diseases appear to be influenced by the number of copies of certain key genes, said Charles Lee, another of the project's leaders at the Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School in Boston, Massachusetts.

"Many examples of diseases resulting from changes in copy number are emerging. A recent review lists 17 conditions of the nervous system alone, including Parkinson's disease and Alzheimer's, that can result from such copy number changes," Professor Lee said.

"Indeed, medical research will benefit enormously from this map, which provides new ways for identifying genes involved in common diseases," he said.

Mark Walport, director of the Wellcome Trust, the medical charity that funded much of the research, said: "This important work will help to identify genetic causes of many diseases."

The key questions answered

What have scientists discovered today?

They have found that each of us is more different genetically than we previously believed. Instead of being 99.9 per cent identical, it may turn out to be more like 99 per cent identical - enough of a difference to explain many variations in human traits. Instead of having just two copies of every gene - one from each parent - we have some genes that are multiplied several times. Furthermore these "multiple copy numbers" differ from one person to another, which could explain human physical and even mental variation.

Why does this matter?

One practical benefit is that it could lead to a new understanding of some of the most difficult, incurable diseases. Although it adds an extra layer of complexity to our understanding of the human genome, the discovery could lead eventually to new insights and medical treatments of conditions ranging from childhood disorders to senile dementia. Scientists are predicting for instance that the knowledge could lead to new diagnostic tests for such diseases as cancer.

How was this discovery made?

Scientists have developed sophisticated methods of analysing large segments of DNA over recent years. "In some ways the methods we have used are 'molecular microscopes', which have transformed the techniques used since the foundation of clinical genetics where researchers used microscopes to look for visible deletions and rearrangements in chromosomes," explained Nigel Carter of the Sanger Institute in Cambridge.

What genes are copied many times and why?

There are just under 3,000 genes in the human genome, which consists of about 3 billion "letters" of the DNA code. The scientists found that more than 10 per cent of these genes appear to be multiplied in the 270 people who took part in the study. They do not know why some genes are copied and some are not. One gene, called CCL3L1, which is copied many times in people of African descent, appears to confer resistance to HIV. Another gene involved in making a blood protein is copied many times in people from south-east Asia and seems to help against malaria. Other research has shown that variation in the number of copies of some genes is involved in Alzheimer's and Parkinson's disease.

Are there any other practical applications?

The scientists looked at people from three broad racial groups - African, Asian and European. Although there was an underlying similarity in terms of how common it was for genes to be copied, there were enough racial differences to assign every person bar one to their correct ethnic origin. This might help forensic scientists wishing to know more about the race of a suspect.

Who made the discovery and where can we read more about it?

Scientists from 13 research centres were involved, including Britain's Sanger Institute in Cambridge, which also took a lead role in deciphering the human genome. The research is published in Nature, Nature Genetics and Genome Research.


Posts: 2198 | Registered: Jun 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Elijah The Tishbite
Member
Member # 10328

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Elijah The Tishbite     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Arwa:
I think Dr.Clyde Winters enjoys playing around with us. If race exist in science, then we would know the gene that codes "race".

LOL, he's doing a great impression of Horemheb, continue to make the same arguments and ignore the evidence against it or just post no evidence at all to back his claims. I still respect the brother despite that.
Posts: 2595 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Arwa
Member
Member # 11172

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Arwa     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
^ I do have alot respect to Dr.Clyde Winters, and I think it's very important subject to cover, because I don't believe all these studies are only to improve better drugs for "race" groups. It smeals KZ ideology. Remember, these scienties lived during race experiment in the 40's-60's.
Posts: 2198 | Registered: Jun 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
lamin
Member
Member # 5777

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for lamin     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
To Arwa:
Re "race" and disease, then what about Tay Sach's disease--found only among the Ashkenazi clinal subset of Europeans? Has this disease ever been diagnosed among generic Africans or South Asians or East Asians?

Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Arwa
Member
Member # 11172

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Arwa     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The aim of HapMap Project:

quote:
The aim of the International HapMap Project is to determine the common patterns of DNA sequence variation in the human genome, by characterizing sequence variants, their frequencies, and correlations between them, in DNA samples from populations with ancestry from parts of Africa, Asia and Europe. The project will thus provide tools that will allow the indirect association approach to be applied readily to any functional candidate gene in the genome, to any region suggested by family-based linkage analysis, or ultimately to the whole genome for scans for disease risk factors.
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v426/n6968/full/nature02168.html

^This article is WELL!!!!! written, and I think "normal" people can follow

Posts: 2198 | Registered: Jun 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 5 pages: 1  2  3  4  5   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.

Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  New Poll  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | EgyptSearch!

(c) 2015 EgyptSearch.com

Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3