|
||||
|
Title: not meant to start anything....But Post by grumpett on Jan 2nd, 2004, 3:36pm I was just wondering if all of us ch er's are white? [center][/center] :-X I am just curious and NOT prejudice.... |
||||
|
Title: Re: not meant to start anything....But Post by Woobie on Jan 2nd, 2004, 3:43pm We had this discussion before.... and the answer is NO. Someone (can't remember who) suggested there should be a demographics study.. maybe a question on the surveys on the OUCH site - but I don't know if they ever did that. Clusters don't discriminate. There ya go......... Glad I could answer SOMETHING around here. ;;D tina |
||||
|
Title: Re: not meant to start anything....But Post by jonny on Jan 2nd, 2004, 7:16pm If you look on the clusterhead pic page you will see a cute black chic named Bernie. Although it seems to be a white thing for the most part if you go by who logs in here. ............................jonny |
||||
|
Title: Re: not meant to start anything....But Post by Patrick_A on Jan 2nd, 2004, 9:27pm My neuro said predominantly caucasian. Lots of mixed races out there. But i dont know for sure! Patrick |
||||
|
Title: Re: not meant to start anything....But Post by AlienSpaceBabe on Jan 2nd, 2004, 11:55pm Well..... Not white.... I'm a bit more on the pink side..... and often quite red when I get embarrassed or, um, well, :-* [smiley=girlflash.gif] ...... Lizzie |
||||
|
Title: Re: not meant to start anything....But Post by cootie on Jan 3rd, 2004, 12:40am I've turn'd green before.....that's when I tried ta be cool and smoke a cigar. Opps......shit......I'm a supporter here too so my color I don't count anyway Pam 8) |
||||
|
Title: Re: not meant to start anything....But Post by Hirvimaki on Jan 5th, 2004, 12:05pm I apologize for the the loquacious post which follows... Just some things to consider. Although it is a populist belief that certain diseases or genetic differences are linked to race - whether it's rates of heart disease and hypertension, the efficacy of "tailored medicines" or sickle cell disease - being of a certain race is not what causes somebody to have the gene variant for Tay-Sachs, or the gene variant for sickle cell. It is having ancestors who were in a geographic region where those things either occurred by chance or were selected for, as in the sickle cell case. Many people think sickle cell is a disease of black people, but that is not necessarily true. Sickle cell is found in people in Greece - the island of Orchomenos, in particular, has very high carrier rates for sickle cell. There are also high carrier rates among people on the Arabian peninsula and people in India. There are parts of India where sickle cell carrier rate is as high as it is anywhere in Africa. On the other hand, people in the southern part of Africa - or people whose ancestry goes back to the southern part of Africa - don't have high sickle cell carrier rates because that allele is selected for only in human beings who have lived where there's a high instance of malaria, which you don't find in southern Africa. People do not carry the sickle cell gene variant because they are of a certain race, but because of some more particularized population history. While there is plenty of genetic variation in humans, most of the variation is individual variation. While between-population variation exists, it is either too small, which is a quantitative variation, or it is not the right type of qualitative variation - it does not mark historical sublineages of humanity. Race is a cultural, political and economic concept, not really a biological one. When you use the same strategy to try to identify race in human populations that evolutionary and population biologists use for non-human species, from salamanders to chimpanzees, you find that there is no biologically based and scientific division of race among humans. 85 % of genetic variation in human DNA is due to individual variation. A mere 15 % can be traced to what could be interpreted as "racial" differences. That 15 % is well below the threshold that is used to recognize race in other species. In many other large mammalian species, there are rates of differentiation two or three times that of humans before the lineages are even recognized as races. Humans are actually one of the most genetically homogenous species on the planet. There's lots of genetic variation in humanity, but it's basically at the individual level. The between-population variation is very, very minor. There is more genetic similarity between Europeans and sub-Saharan Africans and between Europeans and Melanesians, inhabitants of islands northeast of Australia, than there is between Africans and Melanesians. Yet, sub-Saharan Africans and Melanesians share dark skin, hair texture and cranial-facial features, traits commonly used to classify people into races. This example shows that "racial traits" are grossly incompatible with overall genetic differences between human populations. Hirvimaki |
||||
|
Title: Re: not meant to start anything....But Post by ckelly181 on Jan 5th, 2004, 12:34pm Interesting! Did you get that info from the Human Genome Project? There's an article there that echoes your post: http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/now/jun13/ Chris |
||||
|
Title: Re: not meant to start anything....But Post by Hirvimaki on Jan 5th, 2004, 12:50pm Fascinating. I had actually not seen that article. Thanks for posting a link! I am familiar with Marcus Feldman's work. I do think there is a general misconception of "race" and its significance, especially in terms of disease and treatment. I have to agree wholehearrtedly with King when she states, "...ancestry in the genetic sense matters enormously, but the level of ancestry that matters is very rarely race. What matters is either local or universal. What we call 'race' matters for social reasons, rather than genetic correlations of risk." Thanks again for the article. Hirvimaki |
||||
|
Title: Re: not meant to start anything....But Post by floridian on Jan 5th, 2004, 4:06pm Quote:
Largely true. Variation within 'races' is usually greater than variation between races from a biological view. Skin color is about as significant as eye color or hair color in describing a person's genetics (ie, not very). And the "Irish" were once considered a separate race in the US. Race is a generalization - the danger of faulty generalization is real and permeates racist thinking. One could argue that the terms "rich" or "American" are also such broad categories that they are essentially useless. But in some contexts, they describe real patterns. And race can be useful in some medical situations. Having very dark ("black") skin doesn't really affect whether some one hyper-accumulates sodium and is at risk of serious high blood pressure that can be controlled by diet - the risk comes from having ancestors that originated from wet, tropical areas far from the ocean, where salt was rare. But in conducting a public health campaign, the easiest, most cost effective way to reach those people is through Jet Magazine, BET television, etc. Does that make that type of hypertension "a black thing" ?? Not really, but it is a simplification that helps. And if you did a further statistical analysis, you might find that (in general) skin pigment levels are associated with latitude of evolution, and salt metabolism (or malaria exposure) is also associated with latitude - ergo, skin color has some relevance in predicting hypertension, sickle cell, or other medical conditions. Because race is socially constructed and interlaced with other aspects of culture, people's beliefs and behaviors tend to be more consistent within so called racial groups than between them (within a cultural realm like the US, Europe, etc). Raises the questions of how a public health campaign can be objective or effective in a subjective world. Where is skin cancer highest and most deadliest ? In pale people that live in tropical or semitropical areas - targetting 'white' people in Australia or the Caribbean is another way to maximize public benefit from an education campaign. Side note: Sickle cell disease is not common in Greece - Thalassemia and Cooley's anemia are; they are similiar in some ways to sickle cell, but is a different set of mutations. (red cells are smaller, not sickle shaped). Sickle Beta Thalassemia does occur, but is relativey rare compared to other forms. All probably arose in response to malaria's effect on evolution - a single dose of the gene offers partial protection from the parasite. Well, enough food for thought. |
||||
|
Title: Re: not meant to start anything....But Post by Hirvimaki on Jan 5th, 2004, 4:43pm Floridian, Thanks for the info on thalassemia. It is interesting to note - from what little I have now read about it - that Alpha Thalassemia is commonly found in Africa, the Middle East, India, Southeast Asia, southern China, and the Mediterranean region and that Beta Thalassemia is commonly found in people of Mediterranean descent, such as Italians and Greeks, and is also found in the Arabian Peninsula, Iran, Africa, Southeast Asia and southern China. Also that it is surmised that it afforded protection against malaria. I love to learn. Thanks! Hirvimaki |
||||
|
Title: Re: not meant to start anything....But Post by floridian on Jan 5th, 2004, 4:49pm Quote:
Me too - and one branch of my family has its ancestors in Greece, so I have a little knowledge - no active cases, but could be a silent carrier somewhere. Damned recessive genes make a good argument for outbreeding... hookup with some one that is very different!! Just don't sully us with those pictures :o Oops - wrong thread. |
||||
|
Title: Re: not meant to start anything....But Post by Hirvimaki on Jan 5th, 2004, 4:53pm Quote:
Well, I guess among the "yes" votes I can count yours as a "no". :) Quote:
Which is why this Baca from New Mexico went all the way to Scandanavia to find his undies-model wife... Hirvimaki |
||||
|
Title: Re: not meant to start anything....But Post by catlind on Jan 5th, 2004, 4:57pm One line of thinking is that CH is seriously underdiagnosed in african americans because of insurance issues and the typical stereotype of "middle aged white alcoholic smoking male". The ch specific survey that is being designed should help to address this issue. Cat |
||||
|
Title: Re: not meant to start anything....But Post by Little Deb on Jan 5th, 2004, 5:43pm This thread is too deep for me. You are all pretty smart!! Goodness!! That is the biggest word I know! feeling totally ignorant.....little deb :-[ |
||||
|
Title: Re: not meant to start anything....But Post by eyes_afire on Jan 5th, 2004, 6:57pm Grumpett, Nope. --- Esteban (of course, it may depend on how you define 'white') |
||||
|
Clusterheadaches.com Message Board » Powered by YaBB 1 Gold - SP 1.3.1! YaBB © 2000-2003. All Rights Reserved. |