Race and Disease
From: Peter Staudenmaier
Date: Tue Apr 27, 2004 9:37 am
Subject: race and disease
Paulina, our resident expert on race, falls
for an easy one. In reply to my query about "disease weaknesses
that are typical of entire races as such", she
writes:
What about sickle-cell anemia, for an example?
Perhaps Paulina believes that sickle-cell anemia is an example
of a disease that is typical of entire races as such. If so,
I very much encourage her to expound on this interesting theory.
While she's doing that, here's what people who don't believe
in fictions like "racial character" have known about
sickle cell anemia for many years: it is prevalent in people
whose ancestors come from malarial zones, because it is itself
an adaptation to malaria. That means that many people of West
African and Central African origin carry the trait. So do many
people from parts of the Middle East and the Mediterranean basin
as well as south Asia (who knows, maybe those people also count
as "black" in Paulina's eyes). People of East African
or southern African origin rarely have sickle-cell anemia, which
is one reason why the vast majority of African-Americans do not
carry the sickle-cell trait, and hence why it obviously is not
an instance of a disease that is typical of entire races as such.
This information is very readily available in many forums. Here
is a link to an interview with Alan Goodman, whose work I have
recommended several times, addressing the links between sickle
cell and race:
http://www.pbs.org/race/000_About/002_04-background-01-07.htm
And here are several comments from leading sickle-cell associations
on the ethnic and racial dimensions of the disease. The Sickle
Cell Information Center reports:
"Sickle cell is in many
nationalities including African Americans, Africans, Arabs, Greeks,
Italians, Latin Americans, and those from India. You can be Caucasian
and have sickle cell disease or trait. All races should be screened
for this hemoglobin at birth."
http://www.scinfo.org/sicklept.htm
The American Sickle Cell Anemia Association says:
"The error in the hemoglobin
gene results from a genetic mutation that occurred many thousands
of years ago in people in parts of Africa, the Mediterranean
basin, the Middle East, and India."
http://www.ascaa.org/cause.htm
And the Sickle Cell Society confirms:
"The different kinds
of SCD and the different traits are found mainly in people whose
families come from Africa, the Caribbean, the Eastern Mediterranean,
Middle East and Asia."
http://www.sicklecellsociety.org/education/sicklecell.htm
But then, maybe all those people simply share the same "racial
character".
Peter
...................................................................................................................................
From: winters_diana
Date: Tue Apr 27, 2004 12:53 pm
Subject: Re: race and disease
In medicine race is now often spoken of as
a "marker." I recall this term giving confusion on
this list before. I forget who, maybe Daniel, who had the meaning
of a "marker" and what it "marks" reversed,
so I hesitate to plunge ahead with this explanation, but . .
. Bradford found a relevant passage explaining this, though he
didn't seem to get it either.
In medicine a "marker" for disease
means a sort of stand-in, as close as you can get when you don't
know exactly how to "get at" the thing you wish you
could get at (in order to diagnose and treat, or prevent, or
study). Like a signpost: if the person's skin is black, sickle
cell anemia may be "this way." It will be worth looking
in this direction to see what you find. It is worth screening
people with darker skin for sickle cell anemia, because you find
a lot of them that way, and you can help prevent disease. Good
stuff. The point is it is imprecise. The map is not the territory.
People don't have sickle cell anemia because they are black,
and because someone is black doesn't mean they have (or are susceptible
to) sickle cell anemia. It is not in the "racial character"
of blacks to have or be susceptible to sickle cell anemia.
Often they don't know exactly what the marker
marks: genes (which of course vary greatly among members of the
same "race"), exposure to toxins, diet, many possible
things. It isn't really necessary to find out, of course, if
the marker is getting you close enough that your screening is
getting most everybody (is very sensitive; not many false-negatives)
and not incorrectly identifying people as having the disease
who don't (very specific; not many false-positives).
Diana
...................................................................................................................................
From: at
Date: Tue Apr 27, 2004 7:39 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] race and disease
Paulina:
What about sickle-cell anemia, for an example?
Peter Staudenmaier:
Perhaps Paulina believes that sickle-cell
anemia is an example of a disease that is typical of entire races
as such.
Daniel:
And perhaps Paulina does not believe that
sickle-cell anemia is a disease "typical of entire races
as such." As usual Peter Staudenmaier is oversimplifying
a position in order to attack it as silly. The issue of sickle-cell
anemia is not one of either-or, all-or nothing, blanket-racializing,
typical of entire races, prejudicial, close-minded ignorance.
It is simply another instance of the paradox behind the relationship
between the individual to the group. In sociology the paradox
is manifested in the curious fact that although every human being
is unique as an individual, groups of unique individuals are
quite predictable. The same is true of genetics: every individual
is unique. But in groups many things are predictable. This is
the basis of life insurance, as well as health insurance. With
a large enough group you can predict a number of things accurately,
such as the odds of death or the odds of contracting sickle-cell
anemia. Then you can create statistical models using sub-groups
and increase your accuracy even further. It has been noted that
the darker the skin color, the higher the odds of contracting
sickle-cell anemia. Of course, this says nothing absolute about
any individual, only something statistical about the group. The
causes and probable origin of sickle-cell anemia are understood,
and it is understood that it only occurs in an individual when
the exact conditions are met. So looking at a group is kind of
like a "Schrödinger's cat" conundrum - each individual
in the group either does or does not bear the genetic requirements
for sickle-cell anemia, but you only know after you test them
of they do or do not. Before you test the, you know the probability
that they have it, but not whether they do or do not. Now none
of the links contests the accuracy of the probability. What we
hear over and over is that a probability is not a certainty.
Very well, and no one claims that it is. So again we must ask,
what does sickle-cell anemia tell us?
Daniel Hindes
...................................................................................................................................
From: winters_diana
Date: Tue Apr 27, 2004 7:55 pm
Subject: Re: race and disease
Exactly, Daniel, you are agreeing completely
with what I wrote. Skin color as a marker, useful in a practical
sense as indicator of a statistical probability (an indication
in this case to be looking for sickle cell). Not an indication
that because people with darker skin have a higher likelihood
of sickle cell, these people are therefore a race, and certainly
not an indication that just because diseases exist that have
a correlation with skin color, "race" per se is therefore
a reality. And since, as you agree, knowing group probabilities
tells you nothing about an individual, it seems to me this quite
does away with the notion of "racial character" as
manifesting in diseases - a notion Bradford is happily chewing
on, and the same notion on which most of your arguments pertaining
to the Atlantic Monthly article rested.
Diana
Paulina:
What about sickle-cell anemia, for an example?
(Note that she asked this question in response
to Peter's question to Bradford: "Why do you believe that
there are any particular immune system and disease weaknesses
that are typical of entire races as such?")
Daniel:
It has been noted that the darker the skin
color, the higher the odds of contracting sickle-cell anemia.
Of course, this says nothing absolute about any individual, only
something statistical about the group.
...................................................................................................................................
From: at
Date: Wed Apr 28, 2004 1:33 pm
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: race and disease
Group probabilities tell you nothing about
the individual. But they do tell you about the group. As a group,
the Native Americans of 1492 were more susceptable to European
diseases. Not all individuals contracted all diseases, nor were
any of the diseases fatal to all individuals. But as a group
the diseases were quite devastating, and frequently fatal. Now
why was this?
Daniel Hindes
----- Original Message -----
From: winters_diana
Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2004 10:55 PM
Subject: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: race and disease
Exactly, Daniel, you are agreeing completely
with what I wrote. Skin color as a marker, useful in a practical
sense as indicator of a statistical probability (an indication
in this case to be looking for sickle cell). Not an indication
that because people with darker skin have a higher likelihood
of sickle cell, these people are therefore a race, and certainly
not an indication that just because diseases exist that have
a correlation with skin color, "race" per se is therefore
a reality. And since, as you agree, knowing group probabilities
tells you nothing about an individual, it seems to me this quite
does away with the notion of "racial character" as
manifesting in diseases - a notion Bradford is happily chewing
on, and the same notion on which most of your arguments pertaining
to the Atlantic Monthly article rested.
Diana
Paulina:
What about sickle-cell anemia, for an example?
(Note that she asked this question in response
to Peter's question to Bradford: "Why do you believe that
there are any particular immune system and disease weaknesses
that are typical of entire races as such?")
Daniel:
It has been noted that the darker the skin
color, the higher the odds of contracting sickle-cell anemia.
Of course, this says nothing absolute about any individual, only
something statistical about the group.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Click to subscribe to anthroposophy_tomorrow
April/May
2004
The Uncle
Taz "Anthroposophy Tomorrow" Files
Anthroposophy & Anarchism
Anthroposophy & Scientology
Anthroposophical
Morsels
Anthroposophy,
Critics, and Controversy
