I believe the UN issued a statement at its very beginning, based on the work of biologists and anthropologists, that there was no such thing as a scientifically verifiable 'race' among humans. I don't think anything has changed in that regard.
Selma ----- Original Message ----- From: "Keith Hudson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Karen Watters Cole" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2002 3:56 PM Subject: Re: FW: Skull Wars (was Nature vs Nurture and Blank Slate) > Karen, > > At 07:29 17/10/02 -0700, you wrote: > <<<< > Quite by chance I found these two science articles today that correspond to > our Nature vs Nurture debate and Pinker's new book, The Blank Slate. These > new developments are interesting to a history buff like myself, but may be > old news to the real scientists in the group. > >>>> > > Here are a couple of brief comments based on the two articles: > > 1. Boas's study was virtually useless in trying to demonstrate > environmental effects on the shapes and sizes of craniums. He would have > needed to analyse the nutrition of the 13,000 European immigrants very > carefully indeed compared with that of their American-born children. As far > as I'm aware, he didn't do that. Typically, the effects of nutrition and > environment take anything from two to six or more generations to work their > way through as the health of the mothers improve from one generation to the > next enabling them to carry larger foetuses. > > 2. I'm very uncomfortable with the idea of dividing the human species into > 'races' even though there's little doubt that significant physical and > intellectual differences exist between samples of population that have been > geographically distant for appreciable periods of time. Dr Mark Shriver > talks of the differences between people of five regions, but in no way does > this justify talking about five 'races'. For example, in England there are > differences in IQ (of the order of 20 points) between inhabitants of small > towns in the north and the south of the country (even only 200 miles apart > on average!) -- as great as, or even greater, than IQ differences between > the five 'races' that Shriver mentions. Does that suggest that there are > two English races? I'd sooner think in terms of SNP 'threads' -- and there > would be a much larger number of these, some of them more important than > others. These will become clearer in the coming years as genome research > continues apace. > > Keith > > <<<< > A NEW LOOK AT OLD DATA MAY DISCREDIT A THEORY ON RACE @ > http://www.nytimes.com/2002/10/08/science/social/08HEAD.html > > Excerpt: Two physical anthropologists have reanalyzed data gathered by > Franz Boas, a founder of American anthropology, and report that he erred in > saying environment influenced human head shape. Boas's data, the two > scientists say, show almost no such effect. > > The reanalysis bears on whether craniometrics, the measurement of skull > shape, can validly identify ethnic origin. As such, it may prompt a > re-evaluation of the definition of human races and of ancient skulls like > that of Kennewick Man. > > "I have used Boas's study to fight what I guess could be considered racist > approaches to anthropology," said Dr. David Thomas, curator of anthropology > at the American Museum of Natural History in New York. "I have to say I am > shocked at the findings." > > Forensic anthropologists believe that by taking some 90 measurements of a > skull they can correctly assign its owner's continent of origin -- broadly > speaking, its race, though many anthropologists prefer not to use that term > -- with 80 percent accuracy. > > Opponents of the technique, who cite Boas's data, say the technique is > useless, in part because environmental influences, like nutrition or the > chewiness of food, would overwhelm genetic effects. > >>>> > > <<<< > FOR SALE: A DNA TEST TO MEASURE RACIAL MIX @ > http://www.nytimes.com/2002/10/01/health/genetics/01RACE.html > > Excerpt: Dr. Frudakis said the test was based on a set of genetic markers > known as SNP's, pronounced "snips," that were mostly drawn from public > databases. SNP's are sites along the human genome where alternative > chemical letters of DNA, the genetic material, are commonly found, with > some people having one letter, some another. > > Working with Dr. Mark Shriver of Pennsylvania State University, DNAPrint > Genomics has developed SNP's that are diagnostic of a person's continent of > origin, Dr. Frudakis said. These five geographical areas correspond to the > major human population groups or races, those of "Native American, East > Asian, South Asian, European, sub-Saharan African, etc.," according to the > company's Web site. > > The SNP's were validated by testing them against a panel of people from the > five continental areas, and the accuracy of the overall test has been > checked by comparing results with known pedigrees, Dr. Frudakis said. > > All human populations have the same set of genes and much the same set of > variant forms of these genes, inherited from the predecessor species. But > small differences, mostly a shift in the frequency of common genetic > variations, have built up over time in different populations around the > world. Study of these differences has come to the fore largely as a > byproduct of two other lines of inquiry made possible by the Human Genome > Project. One is the ability to track ancient migrations out of Africa from > the different pattern of DNA changes that have accumulated among > populations in each continent breeding in substantial isolation from one > another. > >>>> > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > -------------- > Keith Hudson,6 Upper Camden Place, Bath BA1 5HX, England > Tel:01225 312622/444881; Fax:01225 447727; E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ________________________________________________________________________
