Revitalizing Difference in the HapMap: Race and Contemporary Human Genetic Variation Research

Hamilton, Jennifer A.

doi:10.1111/j.1748-720x.2008.293.x

Cited by 36 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, misunderstanding and extended interpretation of the results might contribute to discrimination, or justify health care and socio-economic inequalities [30]. Therefore, we need to anticipate the various potential social and ethical problems associated with population descriptors.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Human genetic research, race, ethnicity and the labeling of populations: recommendations based on an interdisciplinary workshop in Japan

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundA challenge in human genome research is how to describe the populations being studied. The use of improper and/or imprecise terms has the potential to both generate and reinforce prejudices and to diminish the clinical value of the research. The issue of population descriptors has not attracted enough academic attention outside North America and Europe. In January 2012, we held a two-day workshop, the first of its kind in Japan, to engage in interdisciplinary dialogue between scholars in the humanities, social sciences, medical sciences, and genetics to begin an ongoing discussion of the social and ethical issues associated with population descriptors.DiscussionThrough the interdisciplinary dialogue, we confirmed that the issue of race, ethnicity and genetic research has not been extensively discussed in certain Asian communities and other regions. We have found, for example, the continued use of the problematic term, “Mongoloid” or continental terms such as “European,” “African,” and “Asian,” as population descriptors in genetic studies. We, therefore, introduce guidelines for reporting human genetic studies aimed at scientists and researchers in these regions.ConclusionWe need to anticipate the various potential social and ethical problems entailed in population descriptors. Scientists have a social responsibility to convey their research findings outside of their communities as accurately as possible, and to consider how the public may perceive and respond to the descriptors that appear in research papers and media articles.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Human genetic research, race, ethnicity and the labeling of populations: recommendations based on an interdisciplinary workshop in Japan

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, the concerns from the earlier project about informed consent of providers of samples (not only purchasing consumers but research participants who are sought for enlarging the database), as well as the continuation of racial narratives, coded as biogeographical ancestry, remain (TallBear 2007, Wald 2006. The International HapMap Project has also received attention for this close connection between classical notions of race and the development of human migration analyses (Hamilton 2008), reminding researchers that other knowledges influence interpretation of results found in genetics and elsewhere. These ideologies may also influence the questions asked and the methods used to investigate them.…”

Section: Ancient Dna: Ancestors and Other Disputesmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…This issue and others mark the development of the concept of Native American DNA as it has emerged from a series of controversial projects that set out to sample worldwide human genomic diversity, often focusing on indigenous groups: the HGDP, HapMap Projects (Hamilton 2008), and Genographic Project (Wells & Schurr 2009). The HGDP is described by Cavalli-Sforza (2005) as "a resource that is aimed at promoting worldwide research on human genetic diversity" (p. 333).…”

Section: Ancient Dna: Ancestors and Other Disputesmentioning

confidence: 98%

Native American DNA: Ethical, Legal, and Social Implications of an Evolving Concept

Bardill

2014

Annu. Rev. Anthropol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This review examines the emerging concept of "Native American DNA" utilized by genetic scientists and anthropologists to denote a connection via nucleotide bases between ancient and contemporary peoples of the Americas. This concept is problematic on conceptual and practical levels; this review highlights its use in various disciplines, focusing on ongoing disputes about its meaning and applicability and concluding with a call to attention for all who utilize such concepts. The ethical, legal, and social implications of Native American DNA have to be taken into account because the label itself is still under construction: Contemporary Native American peoples should not be confounded with the past or ancestral remains, but instead must actively be brought into research conversations at all stages.

show abstract

“…Social critics, however, have routinely referred to the HapMap as a "race-based" project (Lee 2006;Reardon 2007;Hamilton 2008), while scientiWc proponents of the utility of ancestral categories such as race have redoubled their arguments for the importance of identifying those genetic features that conform to traditional continent-oforigin categorizations and population-speciWc diVerences in discovering disease susceptibility and drug response variants (Risch 2006;Allocco et al 2007). …”

Section: The Hapmap and Racementioning

confidence: 98%

Looking for race in all the wrong places: analyzing the lack of productivity in the ongoing debate about race and genetics

Foster

2009

Hum Genet

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ongoing debate about the relationship between race and genetics is more than a century old and has yet to be resolved. Recent emphasis on population-based patterns in human genetic variation and the implications of those for disease susceptibility and drug response have revitalized that long-standing debate. Both sides in the debate use the same rhetorical device of treating geographic, ancestral, population-specific, and other categories as surrogates for race, but otherwise share no evidentiary standards, analytic frameworks, or scientific goals that might resolve the debate and result in some productive outcome. Setting a common goal of weighing the scientific benefits of using racial and other social heuristics with testable estimates of the potential social harms of racialization can reduce both the unreflexive use of race and other social identities in biological analyses as well as the unreflexive use of racialization in social critiques of genetics. Treating social identities used in genetic studies as objects for investigation rather than artifacts of participant self-report or researcher attribution also will reduce the extent to which genetic studies that report social identities imply that membership in social categories can be defined or predicted using genetic features.

show abstract

Revitalizing Difference in the HapMap: Race and Contemporary Human Genetic Variation Research

Abstract: Through an examination of the International Haplotype Map (HapMap), this paper explores some of the ways in which relationships among categories of race and genetic variation are being reconfigured in contemporary genetic research.

Cited by 36 publications

References 17 publications

Human genetic research, race, ethnicity and the labeling of populations: recommendations based on an interdisciplinary workshop in Japan

Human genetic research, race, ethnicity and the labeling of populations: recommendations based on an interdisciplinary workshop in Japan

Native American DNA: Ethical, Legal, and Social Implications of an Evolving Concept

Looking for race in all the wrong places: analyzing the lack of productivity in the ongoing debate about race and genetics

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About