Anthropologists' views on race, ancestry, and genetics.

Jennifer K. Wagner,Michael J. Bamshad,Tanya M. Harrell,Joon‐Ho Yu,Jayne O. Ifekwunigwe,Charmaine D. Royal

doi:10.1002/ajpa.23120

Abstract

Controversies over race conceptualizations have been ongoing for centuries and have been shaped, in part, by anthropologists.ObjectiveTo assess anthropologists' views on race, genetics, and ancestry.MethodsIn 2012 a broad national survey of anthropologists examined prevailing views on race, ancestry, and genetics.ResultsResults demonstrate consensus that there are no human biological races and recognition that race exists as lived social experiences that can have important effects on health.DiscussionRacial privilege affects anthropologists' views on race, underscoring the importance that anthropologists be vigilant of biases in the profession and practice. Anthropologists must mitigate racial biases in society wherever they might be lurking and quash any sociopolitical attempts to normalize or promote racist rhetoric, sentiment, and behavior.

Highlights

Heated controversies over the use,appropriation, harmful effects, and rejection of race continue to make regular headlines
Anthropologists agree that it is important to understand the relationships among race, genetics, and health
The data revealed a correlation between familiarity with genetic ancestry testing and perspectives on race; causal connections are not decipherable with data available

Summary

Introduction

Heated controversies over the use, (mis)appropriation, harmful effects, and rejection of race continue to make regular headlines. The continued use of race concepts in genetic research was described recently as “problematic at best and harmful at worst” Two years ago Dobbs (2014) denounced Nicholas Wade’s “A Troublesome Inheritance” (2014)—a book in which Wade, using a combination of circular logic, speculation, and “just-so” stories, made unsubstantiated claims about the genetic basis for three major human races—and described it as “a deeply flawed, deceptive and dangerous book.”. One hundred forty-three leading human geneticists admonished Wade for his “misappropriation” of their research and rejected the idea that their work substantiated any of Wade’s racial claims (Coop et al, 2014). Simple substitution of terms (e.g., race, population, and ancestry) is not a panacea, because each scientific question requires selection of an appropriate lens through which it can be answered

Objectives

Results

Conclusion