Hasty generalisation and exaggerated certainties: reporting genetic findings in health disparities research

Abstract

In the United States, research that examines potential genetic contributions to health disparities often relies on racial categories. Some see benefit in this research especially for conditions where disparities in health status seem strongly associated with racial identity, such as heart disease and prostate cancer. But this research calls for close scrutiny. First, despite common optimism about genetic research, it may not be the most productive way to examine health disparities. And second, this research has the potential to contribute to racial stereotypes, arguably a prime cause of the health disparities the genetic research actually seeks to ameliorate. Two articles reporting results about genetics and heart disease are used to illustrate these concerns. Both report strong correlations between increased vulnerability to heart disease and black racial identity. Despite serious sampling and analysis problems in these articles, the findings rapidly entered the scientific and popular literature. A possible reason for their ready acceptance is their congruence with stereotypes that attribute poor health and genetic inferiority to minority US populations.