Between (Racial) Groups and a Hard Place: An Exploration of Social Science Approaches to Race and Genetics, 2000–2014

As the social sciences expand their involvement in genetic and genomic research, more information is needed to understand how theoretical concepts are applied to genetic data found in social surveys. Given the layers of complexity of studying race in relation to genetics and genomics, it is important to identify the varying approaches used to discuss and operationalize race and identity by social scientists. The present study explores how social scientists have used race, ethnicity, and ancestry in studies published in four social science journals from 2000 to 2014. We identify not only how race, ethnicity, and ancestry are classified and conceptualized in this growing area of research, but also how these concepts are incorporated into the methodology and presentation of results, all of which structure the discussion of race, identity, and inequality. This research indicates the slippage between concepts, classifications, and their use by social scientists in their genetics-related research. The current study can assist social scientists with clarifying their use and interpretations of race and ethnicity with the incorporation of genetic data, while limiting possible misinterpretations of the complexities of the connection between genetics and the social world.     

Race, Ethnicity, and Racism in Medical Anthropology, 1977–2002

Researchers across the health sciences are engaged in a vigorous debate over the role that the concepts of "race" and "ethnicity" play in health research and clinical practice. Here we contribute to that debate by examining how the concepts of race, ethnicity, and racism are used in medical–anthropological research. We present a content analysis of Medical Anthropology and Medical Anthropology Quarterly , based on a systematic random sample of empirical research articles ( n = 283) published in these journals from 1977 to 2002. We identify both differences and similarities in the use of race, ethnicity, and racism concepts in medical anthropology and neighboring disciplines, and we offer recommendations for ways that medical anthropologists can contribute to the broader debate over racial and ethnic inequalities in health.     

Race, ethnicity, and racism in medical anthropology, 1977-2002

Researchers across the health sciences are engaged in a vigorous debate over the role that the concepts of "race" and "ethnicity" play in health research and clinical practice. Here we contribute to that debate by examining how the concepts of race, ethnicity, and racism are used in medical-anthropological research. We present a content analysis of Medical Anthropology and Medical Anthropology Quarterly, based on a systematic random sample of empirical research articles (n = 283) published in these journals from 1977 to 2002. We identify both differences and similarities in the use of race, ethnicity, and racism concepts in medical anthropology and neighboring disciplines, and we offer recommendations for ways that medical anthropologists can contribute to the broader debate over racial and ethnic inequalities in health.     

Obesity,race and the indigenous origins of health risks among Mexican mestizos

We explore the discourses of Mexican scientists and doctors on genetics and obesity and how these relate to ideas about race, class and national identity. Drawing on interviews with geneticists and doctors treating obese children, the paper makes two contributions to the literature on race and medical science. First, although our data reveal familiar racializing tendencies among geneticists, a more nuanced view is needed, as medical doctors who are sceptical about genetic explanations nevertheless tend to racialize, using more environmental and cultural explanations, which adduce epigenetic mechanisms. Second, rather than focusing on minority groups, as in much literature on racialization and genetics, in Mexico ideas about racialized genetic (and cultural) ancestry also impinge on the majority “mestizo” (mixed-race) population, opening broader panoramas of racialized pathologization. These two factors represent an overall strengthening of discourses of race in Mexico and probably in much of Latin America.     

Biological memories of past environments: Epigenetic pathways to health disparities

Human health tends to mirror gradients in social standing related to class, ethnicity and race. Past research in the social sciences suggests that environmental experiences related to social status contribute to these disparities, but the underlying biological mechanisms are only partially understood. Here, we review research related to three domains of environmental exposure that point to epigenetic contributions to health disparities: nutrition, psychosocial stress, and environmental toxicant exposure. Each exposure has effects that may persist across the life course and in some instances may be transmitted to offspring via epigenetic inheritance. Since epigenetic markings provide a "memory" of past experiences, minimizing future disparities in health will be partially contingent upon our ability to address inequality in the current environment. We suggest that future research in environmental epigenetics focus on establishing the reversibility of stress-induced epigenetic modifications, and also on identifying positive epigenetic effects of environmental enrichment.     

From Types to Populations: A Century of Race, Physical Anthropology, and the American Anthropological Association

In the 1960s, U.S. physical anthropology underwent a period of introspection that marked a change from the old physical anthropology that was largely race based to the new physical anthropology, espoused by Washburn and others for over a decade, which incorporated the evolutionary biology of the modern synthesis. What actually changed? What elements of the race concept have been rejected, and what elements have persisted, influencing physical anthropology today? In this article, I examine both the scientific and social influences on physical anthropology that caused changes in the race concept, in particular the influence of the American Anthropological Association. The race concept is complicated but entails three attributes: essentialism, cladistic thinking, and biological determinism. These attributes have not all been discarded; while biological determinism and its social implications have been questioned since the inception of the field, essentialism and the concomitant rendering of populations as clades persists as a legacy of the race concept. [Keywords: race, essentialism, physical anthropology]     

What to Do with Race? Changing Notions of Race in the Social Sciences

The Supplement to the Surgeon General's Report on Mental Health documents that race, ethnicity, and culture are linked to the use of mental health services and the receipt of quality mental health care. The Supplement provides an elaborate discussion on how culture affects mental health care without a corresponding level of discourse on race. How race is handled in the Supplement suggests that it is still a sensitive topic and one that is difficult to address in a public report. This sensitivity parallels the difficulties that the social sciences have had in investigating issues of race. In this paper, we highlight some perspectives that have influenced the way race has been studied in the past and how these views reflect the general political climates of the eras that produced them.     

Two Renowned Nigerian Scholars: Ikenna Nzimiro and Victor Chikesie Uchendu

The article honors two Nigerian anthropologists of Igbo background who recently passed away. Both scholars made major contributions to a broad range of scholarly thought in anthropology and in general social science to crucial issues in Nigerian politics, society and life. Nzimiro is considered in terms of his traditional anthropological training in Germany and England, through which he investigated four Niger River basin communities, and then his emergence as a Marxist anthropologist for the rest of his life in Nigeria, where he consistently critiqued neocolonialism in Nigeria. He explored issues of ethnicity, the Nigerian civil war, militarism, the state of the social sciences, the environment, Oguta culture, where he was born, ethnic conflicts, conditions at Nigerian universities, and other issues. Nzimiro generally rejected the post-colonial world, arguing that it was not revolutionary enough. Uchendu dealt with many of the same issues, but in contrast to Nzimiro he did so by accepting the existence of post-colonial Nigeria, though suggesting many ways to improve education, the environment, cultural and national transition, dependency theory, and to study urbanization and ethnicity, while also writing a major work on Igbo culture. Both authors are honored for their critiques of Nigerian society, as well as their contributions to Igbo ethnology.     

Race, ethnicity, and health: can genetics explain disparities?

Over the past decade, numerous studies have documented profound racial and ethnic disparities in disease in the United States. This essay examines how popular and scientific concepts of race and ethnicity converge with dominant understandings of genetics to inform the design and interpretation of research, public health policy, and medical practice. Although there is some acknowledgment in the biomedical community that racial and ethnic categories are social and not genetic, ideas about race and ethnicity that circulate in biomedicine are contradictory. Thus, in practice genetic explanations for observed differences are common both in the scientific literature and in popular media accounts of biomedical research. Such explanations naturalize racial and ethnic difference and create a conceptual barrier to developing a research program that explores the complex ways in which social inequality and experiences of racial discrimination interact with human biology to influence patterns of disease. Importantly, genetically based ideas lead to disease prevention policies that are bound to be ineffective.     

Scientific Imaginaries and Ethical Plateaus in Contemporary U.S. Toxicology

This article contributes to a growing literature in the anthropology of science, focusing on contemporary U.S. toxicology and the development of "toxicogenomics." Toxicogenomics research aims to understand impacts of environmental stressors at the genetic level and to create a "systems toxicology" that combines different kinds of biological data for holistic understanding. Toxicologists are challenged to deal with greater and greater complexity while fulfilling their historic mission of producing results relevant to regulatory, legal, and clinical decision making. Although there is now a robust body of anthropological work on the sciences—in practice, as sites of cultural production, and as cultural and political-economic forces in a variety of domains—a relatively underdeveloped theme is subject formation within the sciences. This article directs ethnographic attention toward understanding how scientific imaginaries take shape and interpolate technical, biomaterial, political-economic, social, cultural, and ethical elements. We map such efforts in contemporary toxicogenomics as an instance of "civic science."     

Genetic testing and genetic counseling among medicaid-enrolled children with autism spectrum disorder in 2001 and 2007

The rise in the prevalence of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) has resulted in increased efforts to understand the causes of this complex set of disorders that emerge early in childhood. Although research in this area is underway and yielding useful, but complex information about ASD, guidelines for the use of genetic testing and counseling among children with ASD conflict. The purpose of this study was to determine the frequency of use of genetic testing and counseling before the widespread implementation of clinical chromosomal microarray (CMA) to establish a baseline for the use of both services and to investigate potential disparities in the use of both services among children with ASD. We found that about two-thirds of children with ASD received genetic testing or counseling and the use of both services is increasing with time, even in the pre-CMA era. Being female and having a comorbid intellectual disability diagnosis both increased the likelihood of receiving genetic testing and genetic counseling. Initial discrepancies in the use of both services based on race/ethnicity suggest that troubling disparities observed in other services delivered to children with ASD and other mental health disorders persist in genetic testing and counseling as well. These results should incentivize further investigation of the impact of genetic testing and counseling on children with ASD and their families, and should drive efforts to explore and confront disparities in the delivery of these services, particularly with the advancing scientific research on this topic.     

Is research into ethnicity and health racist,unsound, or important science?

Much historical research on race, intelligence, and health was racist, unethical, and ineffective. The concepts of race and ethnicity are difficult to define but continue to be applied to the study of the health of immigrant and ethnic minority groups in the hope of advancing understanding of causes of disease. While a morass of associations has been generated, race and ethnicity in health research have seldom given fundamental new understanding of disease. Most such research is "black box epidemiology." Researchers have not overcome the many conceptual and technical problems of research into ethnicity and health. By emphasising the negative aspects of the health of ethnic minority groups, research may have damaged their social standing and deflected attention from their health priorities. Unless researchers recognise the difficulties with research into ethnicity and health and correct its weaknesses, 20th century research in this subject may suffer the same ignominious fate as that of race science in the 19th century.     

Leveraging genetic ancestry to study health disparities

Research to understand human genomic variation and its implications in health has great potential to contribute in the reduction of health disparities. Biological anthropology can play important roles in genomics and health disparities research using a biocultural approach. This paper argues that racial/ethnic categories should not be used as a surrogate for sociocultural factors or global genomic clusters in biomedical research or clinical settings, because of the high genetic heterogeneity that exists within traditional racial/ethnic groups. Genetic ancestry is used to show variation in ancestral genomic contributions to recently admixed populations in the United States, such as African Americans and Hispanic/Latino Americans. Genetic ancestry estimates are also used to examine the relationship between ancestry-related biological and sociocultural factors affecting health disparities. To localize areas of genomes that contribute to health disparities, admixture mapping and genome-wide association studies (GWAS) are often used. Recent GWAS have identified many genetic variants that are highly differentiated among human populations that are associated with disease risk. Some of these are population-specific variants. Many of these variants may impact disease risk and help explain a portion of the difference in disease burden among racial/ethnic groups. Genetic ancestry is also of particular interest in precision medicine and disparities in drug efficacy and outcomes. By using genetic ancestry, we can learn about potential biological differences that may contribute to the heterogeneity observed across self-reported racial groups.     

Investigating the Relationship between Ethnic Consciousness,Racial Discrimination and Self-Rated Health in New Zealand

In this study, we examine race/ethnic consciousness and its associations with experiences of racial discrimination and health in New Zealand. Racism is an important determinant of health and cause of ethnic inequities. However, conceptualising the mechanisms by which racism impacts on health requires racism to be contextualised within the broader social environment. Race/ethnic consciousness (how often people think about their race or ethnicity) is understood as part of a broader assessment of the ‘racial climate’. Higher race/ethnic consciousness has been demonstrated among non-dominant racial/ethnic groups and linked to adverse health outcomes in a limited number of studies. We analysed data from the 2006/07 New Zealand Health Survey, a national population-based survey of New Zealand adults, to examine the distribution of ethnic consciousness by ethnicity, and its association with individual experiences of racial discrimination and self-rated health. Findings showed that European respondents were least likely to report thinking about their ethnicity, with people from non-European ethnic groupings all reporting relatively higher ethnic consciousness. Higher ethnic consciousness was associated with an increased likelihood of reporting experience of racial discrimination for all ethnic groupings and was also associated with fair/poor self-rated health after adjusting for age, sex and ethnicity. However, this difference in health was no longer evident after further adjustment for socioeconomic position and individual experience of racial discrimination. Our study suggests different experiences of racialised social environments by ethnicity in New Zealand and that, at an individual level, ethnic consciousness is related to experiences of racial discrimination. However, the relationship with health is less clear and needs further investigation with research to better understand the racialised social relations that create and maintain ethnic inequities in health in attempts to better address the impacts of racism on health.     

Biotechnology to improve health in developing countries -- a review

The growing health disparities between the developing and the developed world call for urgent action from the scientific community. Science and technology have in the past played a vital role in improving public health. Today, with the tremendous potential of genomics and other advances in the life sciences, the contribution of science to improve public health and reduce global health disparities is more pertinent than ever before. Yet the benefits of modern medicine still have not reached millions of people in developing countries. It is crucial to recognize that science and technology can be used very effectively in partnership with public health practices in developing countries and can enhance their efficacy. The fight to improve global health needs, in addition to effective public health measures, requires rapid and efficient diagnostic tools; new vaccines and drugs, efficient delivery methods and novel approaches to therapeutics; and low-cost restoration of water, soil and other natural resources. In 2002, the University of Toronto published a report on the "Top 10 Biotechnologies for Improving Health in Developing Countries". Here we review these new and emerging biotechnologies and explore how they can be used to support the goals of developing countries in improving health.     

The Maturation of Ethnoprimatology: Theoretical and Methodological Pluralism

Most remaining populations of primates live in environments that have been influenced in some way by humans (e.g., protected forests bisected by major roads, forest–farm edges, and urban centers). The field of ethnoprimatology has made these environments where humans and other primates interface its primary concern, recognizing that to fully understand primate behavior, our research objectives and practice cannot be disengaged from the human dimension. During the field’s initial years, scholars drew largely from theory and technique in primate ecology and sociocultural anthropology. The contributions to this Special Issue, which include empirical research and review papers, exemplify how the ethnoprimatologist’s toolkit has since expanded to include concepts, frameworks, and methods from the natural sciences (evolutionary biology, conservation ecology, epidemiology), and the social sciences and humanities (anthropology, geography, philosophy, and science studies). Moreover, the settings in which to examine the human–primate interface have diversified to include rural, urban, mixed-landscape, and captive spaces. In this introduction, I review the emergence and scope of ethnoprimatology. I then challenge some of the critiques leveled against ethnoprimatology and highlight its broader conceptual contributions, key elements of the field’s maturation, and recent trends in theoretically and methodologically integrative scholarship in ethnoprimatology. I conclude by offering a set of postulates to guide future ethnoprimatological work that is theoretically and methodological pluralistic and positioned to advance effective primate conservation efforts and facilitate sustainable human–primate coexistence.     

2009 Society for Medical Anthropology Conference: Changing Anthropology,Changing Society

Fifty years after the founding of the field of medical anthropology, the Society for Medical Anthropology of the American Anthropological Association held its first independent meeting on September 24-27, 2009, at Yale University.Fifty years after the founding of the field of medical anthropology, the Society for Medical Anthropology of the American Anthropological Association held its first independent meeting on September 24-27, 2009, at Yale University in New Haven, Connecticut. The conference, Medical Anthropology at the Intersections, drew an international audience of more than 1,000 scholars.In her opening remarks, program Chair Marcia Inhorn noted that medical anthropology has been interdisciplinary since its inception. This assertion was supported at a roundtable discussion, Founding Medical Anthropology and the Society for Medical Anthropology, which featured four of the field’s founders.Asked to identify the factors that led to the development of medical anthropology, the panelists emphasized the role of changes in the practice and landscape of medicine in the late 1950s and early 1960s in the United States. According to Hazel Weidman, who helped spearhead the Society for Medical Anthropology, medical personnel sought social scientists’ guidance in the new clinical environments created by the increasing involvement of U.S. physicians in global development work and by the community-oriented approach to mental health encouraged by the Community Mental Health Act of 1963. The novel inclusion of lifestyle as a determinant of health at this time also played a role, according to Clifford Barnett. Norman Scotch, author of a 1963 review that had helped define medical anthropology as a field, noted that physicians at the time were very interested in the possible applications of the social sciences to medicine [1,2]. Joan Ablon recalled that this emphasis on application led some academic anthropologists to dismiss the medical anthropologist as a “handmaiden to the doctors.” Despite such resistance, interest in medical anthropology as a sub-field was clearly growing among anthropologists. When Weidman helped organize the first gathering of medical anthropologists at an anthropology conference in 1967, attendance was twice what was expected. Panel organizer Alan Harwood noted that the Society for Medical Anthropology transformed its newsletter into a professional journal, Medical Anthropology Quarterly, in 1983. According to Inhorn, the society has 1,300 members today.For the panelists, medical anthropology’s potential for application makes it a compelling scholarly pursuit. As Barnett stated in explaining his decision to work in anthropology: “If you know how a society works, you can change it.”     

Unequally Distributed Psychological Assets: Are There Social Disparities in Optimism,Life Satisfaction,and Positive Affect?

Socioeconomic status is associated with health disparities, but underlying psychosocial mechanisms have not been fully identified. Dispositional optimism may be a psychosocial process linking socioeconomic status with health. We hypothesized that lower optimism would be associated with greater social disadvantage and poorer social mobility. We also investigated whether life satisfaction and positive affect showed similar patterns. Participants from the Midlife in the United States study self-reported their optimism, satisfaction, positive affect, and socioeconomic status (gender, race/ethnicity, education, occupational class and prestige, income). Social disparities in optimism were evident. Optimistic individuals tended to be white and highly educated, had an educated parent, belonged to higher occupational classes with more prestige, and had higher incomes. Findings were generally similar for satisfaction, but not positive affect. Greater optimism and satisfaction were also associated with educational achievement across generations. Optimism and life satisfaction are consistently linked with socioeconomic advantage and may be one conduit by which social disparities influence health.