No abstract

Please confirm the spelling of all authors' names and confirm all earned degrees, affiliations, and disclosures. AU2) Please check whether "Mr." or "Ms." is appropriate in the affiliation and in the footnote for the author Granger. AU3) Please spell out abbreviations "USMLE, CK, ABOS, and AAME" in the text. AU4) Please note that the abbreviation "AOA" has been defined as "Alpha Omega Alpha" and "American Orthopaedic Association" in the document. Please check and correct if necessary. AU5) Please provide the volume number and page range for the reference 20. AU6) Please define abbreviation "CORD" in the Table 1. AU7) Please check the retained captions of Tables 1-5, as there were two different captions provided. AU8) Please define abbreviation "NRMP" in the Table 2.

Recently, Drs. Bethard and DiGangi opened a dialogue on the application of ancestry estimation as part of the biological profile in forensic anthropology [1]. Ancestry estimation of human skeletal remains is routinely used to predict a probable social race based on metric and morphological data from the skeleton. Anthropologists accept the social construction of race and are acutely aware of its harmful impact in American society, particularly with respect to the historic use of anthropology to promote scientific racism. When scientists fail to 'call out' racist ideas in their field, these ideas can become embedded within institutions and society, further reifying racist ideology [2]. In this context, we wish to respond to Bethard and DiGangi's request to open a conversation regarding the use of ancestry estimation in forensic anthropology and how it contributes to the identification process. In this letter, we provide a foundation for a conversation about ancestry as a means to encourage thoughtful discussion moving forward on the issues of redress, diversity, and multidisciplinary collaboration.