Talk:Race in biomedicine

message: Shouldn't something about blacks and sickle cell anemia be in this article?--69.243.125.36 19:27, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: No - There sould be something about mixed race and anemia 87.194.35.230 18:15, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Sickle-cell disease]]

message: the lead section hasn't been changed as the article has grown in content. it should be rewritten to function as a summary. --Rikurzhen 18:35, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  lead section needs an upgrade 

message: Allow me to step in here a moment and ask a question. How is 'race' defined?
I shall admit here that I haven't read the race article in Wikipedia yet, and I may find an answer there. However, in my capacity as an amateur entomologist, I dicussed with a professional in the field what is meant scientifically by 'race' and his answer was direct and unequivocal. He stated that a 'race' is simply a geographical population variant within a species that possesses a set of genes common to that population, which are not found outside that population. As an example I was pointed in the direction of Papilio dardanus (Brown, 1776), an African Swallowtail butterfly that exhibits population variance of this kind (see this article for more information). This butterfly is characterised by males that are a uniform black and white colour, but females that posses mimetic patterns modelled upon toxin-sequestering species of butterflies from other families, presumably to acquire protection through Batesian mimicry. The point here is that different geographical populations of those butterflies have females that are mimetic with respect to different model species. The details of the mimetic pattern are, in fact, controlled by polygenes - and if one takes a male from population A, and mates that male with a female from population B, the mimetic pattern is destroyed in the resulting female offspring. Indeed, it was while analysing this very subject that Professor Sir Cyril Clarke (who was a leading light in my Entomology Society until his death) had a 'eureka moment',  realised that polygenes provide the best model for the inheritance of the Rhesus factor in humans, which led him (along with co-worker Dr Ronald Finn) to devise the therapeutic procedures for neonatal Rhesus haemolytic disease, for which he was knighted, and for which he also received a Lasker Award. From a scientific viewpoint, this is not problematic, and neither is it problematic to analyse whether or not such genetic population variants exist among humans, and whether or not those differences contribute to different patterns of disease. I suspect part of the problem here is that 'race' has acquired unfortunate political connotations through human history, and while sensitivity to those is appropriate, the legacy of the past makes sensible progress in this area difficult. Therefore, can I issue a plea that [1] terms are properly defined, [2] the effect of using different definitions in different research projects is duly highlighted so that accurate assessments can be made, and [3] that an effort be made by all concerned to ensure that the focus of the article remains strictly that of medical science? Calilasseia 22:11, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think races could also be thought of as normative groups that mixed race people and especially multi racial individuals are outside. 87.194.35.230 18:47, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Definition of 'Race'

message: The head of the Human Genome Diversity Project has cautioned researchers about making hasty conclusions about race ... so this* is just off topic and OR. Unless there is a source that can be cited linking the HGDP to claims about race (not population groups!) futurebird 07:01, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: * This?  This what? P0M 01:33, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: HGDP on race?

message: The most useful part of this article is its reporting on research that links the good practice of medicine to knowledge about the genetic strengths and weaknesses that (together with relevant environmental factors) influence which individuals are statistically more likely to acquire certain diseases, which individuals are statistically more likely to respond well to certain medications or courses of treatment, etc. Why waste that good content by smushing it in with problematical ideas about [race]?
When medicine has the complete genetic identity of individuals to work with there will no longer be any need to make a first guess at what will work by looking at the so-called [race] of the individual. Attempts to deal with fairly large population groups on the basis of some clustering of factors thought relevant to some specific disease will be in the domain of public health at that point.
Rather than wasting the good content of this article, it should be renamed "Genetics and biomedicine" and purged of the ideas of [race] that detract from the real knowledge that is being gained. P0M 01:33, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Which sections do you feel are problems? futurebird 01:36, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Rename this article and purge references to race

message: * The effects of racial and ethnic identities on health --> Move to Race and health
* Disease association studies ----> Move some of this to Race and health 
* Genetic labeling --->Move to Race and health
* Genetic differences among races ---> Ax it. It seems to be OR. Unless some sources can be found.
* Research ---> Ax, unless a source can be found for the first half
Then rename what's left. "genetics and health" unless there is an article on that topic already. futurebird 01:41, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: My idea