Heredity In Relation Research Articles

Vulnerability, transgenerationality, parenting styles, and use of psychoactive substances by adolescents

PurposeThe purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between parenting styles, family psychological vulnerability environment (FPVE) and drug use among adolescents.Design/methodology/approachThe quantitative survey using paper and pencil was administered to collect data from 284 parents registered with a paediatric clinic in the city of São Paulo (Brazil), most of whom claimed that their children used drugs. FPVE was measured by eight scales: family relationship patterns and drug use habits; hereditary predisposition to drug use; transmission of moral values to children (reverse); parents’ hereditary predisposition; parental drug use; depression; impulsiveness; and anxiety.FindingsDimensions of FPVE that had effect on drug use by adolescents were: the family relationship and drug use patterns of the family of procreation, drug use by the parents and heredity in relation to drug use. Conversely, the family relationship and drug use patterns of the family of origin and the parents’ anxiety, symptoms of depression and impulsiveness did not affect their children’s drug use.Research limitations/implicationsOne limit of this study is the sample of parents. These parents were parents of adolescents that were at psychological treatment. The authors do not know if part of parents who declared that their children are not drug users, because the treatment effect. Another limit is that this study did not compare the effect of parents’ drugs misuse with parents that do not use drugs on adolescent drug use. One other limit is that the parents were treated regardless of whether they were mothers or fathers.Originality/valueThis study expands the study of the antecedents of drug use by adolescents, considering FPVE as a construct. Regarding this construct when facing resources limitation, the practitioners can prioritize strategies to prevent adolescent drug use.

An Article on Genetics and Heredity in Relation to Sports Performance

An Article on Genetics and Heredity in Relation to Sports Performance

Davenport's Dream: 21st Century Reflections on Heredity and Eugenics

“Charles Davenport had the best of intentions.” So begins Matt Ridley's Foreward in Jan Witkowski's and John Inglis' collection of essays Davenport's Dream: 21st Century Reflections on Heredity and Eugenics. Witkowski and Inglis, of the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory on Long Island, have assembled a timely review of the work of pioneering geneticist and eugenicist Charles Davenport. Charles Davenport was a brilliant biologist who was the pivotal advocate of eugenics in the United States during the first half of the twentieth century. He founded and directed the Eugenic Record Office at Cold Spring Harbor on Long Island, which became the hub of American eugenics. Davenport's Dream is a reprint of Davenport's famous textbook, Heredity in Relation to Eugenics, with commentary by twelve prominent scientists and other scholars. While Davenport's genetics was sophisticated for his time, his science today is of no value. The historical importance of Davenport's work is his advocacy of eugenics. Davenport observed: “the traits of the feeble-minded and the criminalistic are normal traits for … an earlier stage in man's evolution” (Heredity in Relation to Eugenics, New York: Henry Holt, 1911, 262). The eugenic solution to society's sin against Darwinian natural selection was an artificial selection—breeding. Davenport was explicit: “marriage is an experiment in breeding; and the children, in their varied combinations of characters, give the result of the experiment” (Heredity in Relation to Eugenics, 7). Davenport endorsed the prerogative of the state to police its genetic stock: “The commonwealth is greater than any individual in it. Hence the rights of society over the life, the reproduction, the behavior and the traits of the individuals that compose it are … limitless” (Heredity in Relation to Eugenics, 268).

Jan A Witkowski and John R Inglis (eds), Davenport’s dream: 21st century reflections on heredity and eugenics, New York, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, 2008, pp. xiii, 298, $55.00 (hardback 978-0-87969-756-3).

In 1911 Charles Benedict Davenport published the first edition of Heredity in relation to eugenics. Grounded firmly in the belief that a multitude of physical, mental and even career-related (e.g. seafaring) traits followed a pattern of Mendelian inheritance, the American scientist’s book was a principal guide to eugenic studies in the early twentieth-century. However, by the mid-1940s his text had become regarded as at best misguided, at worst a resource for earlier US sterilization programmes, and even Nazi race policies. Moreover, “even by the standards of his own day”, Davenport’s science of heredity was “usually dubious and often plain wrong”, the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory he helped found amounting “scientifically to much less than it might have been”. (D J Kevles, In the name of eugenics, 2nd ed., Cambridge, MA, 1995, p. 48). Davenport’s Dream, edited by Jan Witkowski and John Inglis (both scientists at Cold Spring Harbour Laboratory), brings Heredity in relation to eugenics to light again, a facsimile of it accompanying ten essays written by eminent voices in the field of genetics, opening with James Watson’s discussion of ‘Genes and Politics’. As a key document in the history of biology and of the eugenics movement in America, Witkowski and Inglis consider Davenport’s book worthy of reconsideration; however, the most compelling reason they identify is that problems he attempted to tackle, moral and ethical issues the eugenics movement highlighted, remain of public interest today and subject to “cautious scientific enquiry” (p. viii). Furthermore, increasingly sophisticated knowledge and techniques—not least the completion of the Human Genome Project—have changed the scale of debate about use of DNA-related information: from efforts to improve a race, to those aimed at individual genetic constitutions. Read together, these essays—each written with reference to Davenport’s work—combine to produce an exposition on aspects of modern genetics, some highly technical, such as mitochondrial DNA technology. The presence of the original text itself is therefore crucial, helping to embed often complex accounts of, and justifications for, modern genetic research in an historical context. That said, nearly all the authors are scientists. The effect overall is to showcase articulate, considered, frequently persuasive claims, yet each with a pronounced pro-science bias. Lewis Wolpert’s closely argued contribution, the last (intentionally?), is especially robust in its placement of human nature within the reach of genetic manipulation. The media’s tendency towards “genetic pornography” and “moral masturbators’” objections to human cloning both earn his rebuke in what is a resolutely positivist polemic. Although indubitably erudite and informative, Wolpert’s contention, that “reliable scientific knowledge” (as opposed to “unreliable” knowledge or the technology to which “reliable” knowledge is applied) is “value-free” (p. 189) denotes a strangely ahistorical position, at odds with a volume intended to inform and enrich contemporary issues in genetic research by offering direct comparison and reference to a principal source. An earlier entry does offer slightly less staunch conclusions. ‘Genes in mind’ is Lindsey Kent and Simon Baron-Cohen’s attempt to disentangle the nature (genetics)/nurture (environment) controversy with reference to current scientific explanation of the nature of human mind. Unlike other essays, theirs is especially explicit in admitting the limitations of genetics so far: that concerning behaviour and personality, genes’ known influence “is only modest for many traits”; genetics “may lead to some important medical breakthroughs” (my emphases). Hence they conclude that further investment of time and money is warranted less for tangible outcomes, more for intellectual advance: “to teach us how we—and our brains—are made … the pursuit of such knowledge is worthwhile in its own right” (p. 156). By adopting a light touch—a brief preface, then short introductory pieces preceding each essay—the editors permit the contributors and their particular, mainly pro-research agendas to dominate. This does not make for an especially fluent read, or, as suggested above, a balanced account. None the less, echoing another review (R Pollack, ‘Thoughts on humane genetics’, Science, 2008, 321: 492–3), this is an important work and useful general teaching aid in science, medicine, law and ethics. It demonstrates contemporary scientific justification for continued and appropriate use of genetic information, despite and readily cognisant of past abuses.

Davenport's Dream: 21st Century Reflections on Heredity and Eugenics. Edited by Jan A. Witkowski and, John R. Inglis. Cold Spring Harbor (New York): Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press. $55.00. xiii + 490 p. + 2 pl.; ill.; index. 978‐0‐87969‐756‐3. [Includes a facsimile of Heredity in Relation to Eugenics, by Charles Benedict Davenport, published by Henry Holt and Company, New York,

<i>Davenport's Dream: 21st Century Reflections on Heredity and Eugenics</i>. <i>Edited by</i> Jan A. Witkowski <i>and</i>, John R. Inglis. Cold Spring Harbor (New York): Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press. $55.00. xiii + 490 p. + 2 pl.; ill.; index. 978‐0‐87969‐756‐3. [Includes a facsimile of <i>Heredity in Relation to Eugenics</i>, by Charles Benedict Davenport, published by Henry Holt and Company, New York,

Davenport's dream: 21st century reflections on heredity and eugenics

Preface Jan A. Witkowski and John R. Inglis, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Foreword Matt Ridley, Newcastle-upon-Tyne Genes and Politics James D. Watson, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Charles Benedict Davenport, 1866-1944 Jan A. Witkowski, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory The Eugenic World of Charles Benedict Davenport Elof A. Carlson, University at Stony Brook Davenport's Dream Maynard V. Olson, University of Washington Genetic Determinism and Evolutionary Ethics: A Mitochondrial Perspective Douglas C. Wallace, University of California, Irvine Psychiatric Genetics in an Era of Relative Enlightenment Daniel R. Weinberger, National Institute of Mental Health, and David Goldman, National Institute of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Genes in Mind? Lindsey Kent, St. Andrews University, and Simon Baron-Cohen, Cambridge University Davenport and Heredity Counseling Philip R. Reilly, Interleukin Genetics Genetics and Equality Ronald Dworkin, New York University School of Law Genetics and Human Nature Lewis Wolpert, University College London A Reprint of Heredity in Relation to Eugenics Charles Benedict Davenport (Published by Henry Holt and Company, New York, 1911) Index

Thoughts on Humane Genetics

Davenport's Dream . 21st Century Reflections on Heredity and Eugenics. By Jan A. Witkowski and John R. Inglis, Eds. . Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, NY, 2008. 520 pp. $55. ISBN 9780879697563. This volume combines a reprint of Charles Davenport's 1911 Heredity in Relation to Eugenics with discussions of its themes---including human genetic variation, mental illness, nature versus nurture, and human evolution---in a contemporary context.

The Scopes Trial

Evolutionary Anthropology: Issues, News, and ReviewsVolume 16, Issue 4 p. 126-131 Crotchets & QuiditiesFree Access The Scopes Trial “People, this is no circus. There are no monkeys up here. This is a lawsuit, let us have order.” Court Officer Rice Kenneth M. Weiss, Kenneth M. Weiss Anthropology and Genetics at Penn State UniversitySearch for more papers by this author Kenneth M. Weiss, Kenneth M. Weiss Anthropology and Genetics at Penn State UniversitySearch for more papers by this author First published: 28 August 2007 https://doi.org/10.1002/evan.20144Citations: 3AboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL REFERENCES 1Anonymous. 1925. The world's most famous court trial: Tennessee evolution case. Cincinnati: National Book Company. 2 Leinwand G. 2007. William Jennings Bryan: an uncertain trumpet. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield. 3 Scopes JT,Presley J. 1967. Center of the storm: memoirs of John T. Scopes. New York: Holt, Rinehart, Winston. 4 Hunter GW. 1914. A civic biology: presented in problems. New York: American Book Company. 5 JR Tompkins, editor. 1965. D-Days at Dayton: reflections on the Scopes trial. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press. 6 Darrow C. 1932. The story of my life. New York: Scribner's. 7 Lawrence J,Lee RE. 1955. Inherit the wind. New York: Random House. 8 Larson EJ. 1997. Summer for the gods: the Scopes trial and America's continuing debate over science and religion. New York: Basic Books. 9 Davenport CB. 1911. Heredity in relation to eugenics. New York: Henry Holt. 10 Weinberg A,Weinberg L. 1980. Clarence Darrow: a sentimental rebel. New York: G.P. Putman's. 11 ST Joshi, editor. 2005. Closing arguments: Clarence Darrow on religion, law, and society. Athens: Ohio University Press. 12 Darrow C. 1925. The Edwardses and the Jukeses. Am Mercury 6: 147– 157. 13 Darrow C. 1926. The eugenics cult. Am Mercury 8: 129– 137. 14 Scott EC. 2004. Evolution vs. creationism: an introduction. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press. 15 Darwin C. 1871. The descent of man and selection in relation to sex. London: J. Murray. 16 Graffin G,Provine W. 2007. Evolution, religion and free will. Am Sci 95: 294– 297. Citing Literature Volume16, Issue4July/August 2007Pages 126-131 ReferencesRelatedInformation

Laws of Heredity in Relation to General Mental Ability

(1947). Laws of Heredity in Relation to General Mental Ability. The Journal of General Psychology: Vol. 36, No. 1, pp. 29-43.

ENVIRONMENT AND HEREDITY IN RELATION TO VITAMIN CONTENTS OF PLANTS

Environment and Heredity in Relation to Vitamin Contents of Plants Get access Nutrition Reviews, Volume 4, Issue 7, July 1946, Pages 219–221, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1753-4887.1946.tb08858.x Published: 01 July 1946

Human Heredity in Relation to Animal Genetics

Human Heredity in Relation to Animal Genetics

Heredity and Crime

Dr. Foxe, the author of this article, was Psychiatrist on the staff of the Great Meadow Prison, New York, from 1933 to 1939. He is now engaged in the practice of psychiatry in New York City. He is Associate Managing Editor of the Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease and Associate Editor of the Psychoanalytic Review. Many people have a glib way of saying: It's heredity. There is a dearth of scientific discussions of heredity in relation to crime-and that's why this paper has been written.-EDIrroR

Medical Genetics and Eugenics

If the reader interprets the title of this book literally he is sure to be disappointed, for this is not a compendium or a comprehensive treatise. It is merely a rather elementary series of six lectures on certain aspects of general human genetics, with emphasis on the medical and eugenic phases of the subject. The lectures, three by the veteran human geneticist C. B. Davenport and one each by the other authors, were delivered at the Woman's Medical College of Pennsylvania in March 1940 in connection with the nineteenth anniversary of the founding of the college. Dr. Davenport presents in interesting form the well known standard data on human variability and mate selection, on some social applications of eugenics, and on heredity in relation to medicine. Dr. Keeler, in a short but interesting chapter, discusses the value of animal experiments to the understanding of human genetics. Dr. Slye reviews her

The New Systematics

DR. HUXLEY and his co-authors have succeeded in producing a book which makes most stimulating reading. In all, twenty-two authors have contributed a chapter each and, as mentioned in the foreword, British authors predominate, since it was felt that this would facilitate the co-ordination of the articles. Where Great Britain could not supply a suitable authority on some subject, authors of other nationalities were invited to write a chapter. Some idea of the ground covered may be obtained from a few of the chapter headings taken at random: A museum zoologist's view of taxonomy; Mutations and geographical variation; Ecological aspects of plant taxonomy; Problems of the origin of species; Polymorphism and taxonomy; The statistical consequences of Mendelian heredity in relation to speciation; Taxonomic species and genetic systems; The new systematics of cultivated plants; and so forth. Minor systematics have naturally received the greatest share of attention for the very good reason that it is the minor units which most urgently require attention, and also, as it happens, they are the most amenable to experimental analysis. The New Systematics Edited by Julian Huxley. Pp. viii + 583. (Oxford: Clarendon Press; London: Oxford University Press, 1940.) 21s. net.

Heredity in Relation to the Family

Heredity in Relation to the Family

Heredity in Relation to Malocclusion

Heredity in Relation to Malocclusion

Remarks on heredity in relation to tuberculosis

Remarks on heredity in relation to tuberculosis

A Chadwick Lecture on Heredity in Relation to Mental Disease and Mental Deficiency

A Chadwick Lecture on Heredity in Relation to Mental Disease and Mental Deficiency

The Harveian Oration ON HEREDITY IN RELATION TO MENTAL DISEASE: Delivered before the Royal College of Physicians of London on October 19th, 1925

The Harveian Oration ON HEREDITY IN RELATION TO MENTAL DISEASE: Delivered before the Royal College of Physicians of London on October 19th, 1925

Inheritance and Insanity

THIS year's Harveian Oration before the Royal College of Physicians of London was delivered by Sir Frederick Mott on heredity in relation to mental disease. A subject of more pressing urgency and general public interest could scarcely have been chosen. The gravest problems of individual ethics and State medicine depend entirely for their solution on the state of our knowledge concerning it; yet precise knowledge is fragmentary and may be misleading.