# Americans are genetically superior to all others.

No other country has the same level of variety in its gene pool than America. Variety in the gene pool is important for increasing the odds of survival against genetic defect. Therefore, I assert that as a whole, Americans are genetically superior to all others.

eNtRopY

Chemicalsuperfreak
'muhricans have the greatest variety? Hmm. Is there a ranking? What about Brazil? Or south africa?

Deslaar
I presume this is a joke. Reading it out of context (if there is a context) I give it a 2/10.

It's not a joke. It's a reality you can't deny.

Do some research on the people of Ireland. You will see that their relatively small gene pool has led to larger numbers of genetic defects per populace than normal. This situation is also readily observed in small communities that do not allow breeding with outsiders... such as the Amish.

Most Americans do not descend from a single ethnic group. Therefore, I propose that the average American has more genetic variety than the average person from almost all (if not all) other countries.

eNtRopY

Deslaar
Originally posted by eNtRopY
It's not a joke. It's a reality you can't deny.

Do some research on the people of Ireland. You will see that their relatively small gene pool has led to larger numbers of genetic defects per populace than normal. This situation is also readily observed in small communities that do not allow breeding with outsiders... such as the Amish.

Most Americans do not descend from a single ethnic group. Therefore, I propose that the average American has more genetic variety than the average person from almost all (if not all) other countries.

eNtRopY

Well first of all I don't believe there is any such thing as an "American gene-pool" since America is not a sexually isolated population. Second of all I don't believe that America is the most genetically varied population. I would say that accolade would go to Greater Europe.

kyle_soule
Originally posted by eNtRopY
Americans are genetically superior to all others.

I agree, we are superior

Although, I have noticed, that we are not the most attractive. We have a lot of attractive people, but 'pure-breads' seem to be on a higher level of 'beautiful' than we are.

Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
MONGRELS RULE!

Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
First look at the demographics and then say something Entropy! Pfff, for your information: a detailed study showed that people in the Netherlands are the healthiest and I am very sure that the US is somewhere down in no 20.

Quasaire
I think Andorra use to have the longest life expectancy. It was like an avg 94 years for men and women if I remember correctly. That may not be true now, however. But even with that America being 5% (291 million / 6.2 billion) of the world's population owning 1/4 ($10 trillion /$40 trillion) of the wealth is definitely the richest.

Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
Maybe the richest, but the healthcare providing is quite bad. If I am correct, Norway has the best system for healthcare.. Scandanavian Healthcare tends to be provided by the government. I thougth that the Japanese lived the longest..

The United States is over-industrialized, which is a source of a lot of diseases. I don't think the country is old enough yet to make a homogeneous 'healthy' gene-pool. Still only a very small percentage of marriages in inter-racial.

And btw, Belgium was no. 2 on the list of countries with the healthiest people (overall taken), and guess what: belgians came from the dutch (with some admixture). *proud* And something else: dutch people are the tallest in the world, which is also a good indicator of good nutrition.

And talking about isolated populations with a limited gene-pool: that certainly doesn't mean that those populations are diseased populations. I myself study a disease in the Finnish population so I know quite a lot about population genetics. There ARE about 30 genetic diseases that have a very high prevelance in Finland and are virtually non-existent in other populations.. But this is balanced by the fact that other genetic disorders are not present in Finland, like cystic fibrosis for instance. This is called genetic drift. Some diseases will be enriched and others will disappear. Only in the situation that you have got direct inbreeding within the first or second degree that you would get a diseased population.

We aren't as similar to eachother as you might think we are Entropy, so I really really doubt that the states is a genetically privaledged society.

Sting
I think Andorra use to have the longest life expectancy. It was like an avg 94 years for men and women if I remember correctly.

WHen was this? I think Japan has the highest life expentancy but I haven't kept up with current trends.

I presume this is a joke. Reading it out of context (if there is a context) I give it a 2/10.

A little off topic but you could reduce that to 1/5

The only reason Americans do not have a longer life expectancy is because of the high costs of quality food and health care in America. My point is that statisically, Americans should be less prone to genetic disorder (i.e. birth defects, retardation, etc) than any other group of people.

eNtRopY

Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
Originally posted by Sting
WHen was this? I think Japan has the highest life expentancy but I haven't kept up with current trends.

Funny, because that is exactly what I said in my post, so it must be true :P I work with two Japanese and they agree :D

And Entropy, quality food is not expensive AT ALL! It is just that the junk food is so CHEAP! A big difference there. Life in Europe is WAAAYY more expensive than life in the US, I think that Americans have a lot more money to spent than other populations, but they are kind of taken over by this whole pop-culture thing where everything has to be fast and easy?

And I stay by my point that the term genetic term American person is non-existent. Just what percentage of the European population is affected by these very rare recessive disorders? Does a Fin marying a Parisian really make a difference compared to a Fin from Helsinki compared to a Fin from Kuopio? I don't think so, I think they are equally as different. If you can, look up some articles from Leena Peltonen, eastern and western finland by themselves are very homogeneous populations, but when you compare the two they are very different.

I still don't quite understand why Americans like using the terms African American and Caucasian, first of all: Caucasians can come from Africa, second of all, people from Africa compared to Europeans are equally different compared to someone from Spain and Finland. I was even surprised that Saudi Arabian people and people from India are also classified as Caucasian.

Sting
I was even surprised that Saudi Arabian people and people from India are also classified as Caucasian.

Yes, that came as a shock to me as well when I first read it.

Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
Caucasian according to the american heritage dictionary:

SYLLABICATION: Cau·ca·sian

PRONUNCIATION: kô-kzhn, -kzhn

1. Anthropology Of or being a major human racial classification traditionally distinguished by physical characteristics such as very light to brown skin pigmentation and straight to wavy or curly hair, and including peoples indigenous to Europe, northern Africa, western Asia, and India. No longer in scientific use. See Usage Note at race1.
2. Of or relating to the Caucasus region or its peoples, languages, or cultures.
3. Of or relating to a group of three language families spoken in the region of the Caucasus mountains, including Chechen, Abkhaz, and the Kartvelian languages.

NOUN:
1. Anthropology A member of the Caucasian racial classification. Not in scientific use.
2. A native or inhabitant of the Caucasus.
3. The Caucasian language family.

Especially noteworthy: the term is still used daily in scientific populations to genetically distinguish a 'caucasian' and 'african american' group.

Originally posted by Monique
Does a Fin marying a Parisian really make a difference compared to a Fin from Helsinki compared to a Fin from Kuopio? I don't think so, I think they are equally as different. If you can, look up some articles from Leena Peltonen, eastern and western finland by themselves are very homogeneous populations, but when you compare the two they are very different.

How about this? A Dutch person from Utrecht marries his high school sweetheart (also from Utrecht), and these two people produce offspring. Now, a Dutch person from the same town emmigrates to America, marries a person whose ancestory is English, and also produces offspring. You tell me which children will have more genetic variety.

eNtRopY

Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
what about Canadian Entropy? I think we are more diverse than then the USA. We got Btritish, Irish, Stochttish, English, French, Western Europe and Native Ameriquan Blood. I think we have more diversity than you guys. Also we have some black blood you did wan't during the revolution.

I think Canada has the greatest diversity!!!!

Originally posted by iansmith
what about Canadian Entropy? I think we are more diverse than then the USA. We got Btritish, Irish, Stochttish, English, French, Western Europe and Native Ameriquan Blood. I think we have more diversity than you guys. Also we have some black blood you did wan't during the revolution.

I think Canada has the greatest diversity!!!!

You've got to be kidding me. Are you saying America has no blacks? Have you actually been to America? Trust me, we have more diversity than anyone including Canada.

eNtRopY

Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
well, Australia... is Australia.. and we rock.....so ner.

Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
Originally posted by eNtRopY
You've got to be kidding me. Are you saying America has no blacks? Have you actually been to America? Trust me, we have more diversity than anyone including Canada.

eNtRopY

I've been to the states. I'm not saying that American do not have black. I think you're just full of your self

Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
Originally posted by iansmith
what about Canadian Entropy? I think we are more diverse than then the USA. We got Btritish, Irish, Stochttish, English, French, Western Europe and Native Ameriquan Blood. I think we have more diversity than you guys. Also we have some black blood you did wan't during the revolution.

I think Canada has the greatest diversity!!!!

*ughm* Africa has the greatest diversity.

And Entropy, your example might be true that the children have more genetic variety, but by all means, I really don't think that if two people from Utrecht marry each other that there is any kind of inbreeding. Only in populations that were recently founded by a handfull of people would this occur, as in some areas of Finland. The only place where your scenario might work is on one of the small dutch islands in the north where people are geographically isolated.

If you can, please take a look at the following publication:

Norio R.
The Finnish Disease Heritage III: the individual diseases.
Hum Genet. 2003 May;112(5-6):470-526. Epub 2003 Mar 08. Review.
PMID: 12627297 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
And let's look at it in another way: maybe the genes of the two individuals will be incompatible and genetic disease will occur? One would think that the genes in a country are adjusted to each other to work in harmony, by selection. If you go and introduce new varients which interact with the existing gene, you have got a problem!

Think for instance about a protein that forms a heterodimer with the gene product of the other allele.. in the one population only the compatible forms of the alleles would be present, in the other population other compatible alleles might be present. What happens if you combine those two? You get a dominant genetic disorder, not a good thing right?

Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
Originally posted by Monique
*ughm* Africa has the greatest diversity.

Got any proof ? Can You trust a canadian saying that canada has the greatest diversity or can you trust an american !!!!

Anyway, i know that i have different ancestry but it is far away (4-5 generation) therefore it is pretty much diluted.

It would be interresting to do population genetics and see how "diverse" a population is compare to another one.

As you say Monique, diversity does not mean superior. You could also have diversity for many genes but have very little diversity for other genes. The less diverse genes migth be the one that can be important for futur "selection" and the population migth become "instinct" due to lack of diversity.

Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
Dearly Missed

Last edited by a moderator:
Gold Member
Was that Santa Claus's sleigh I just heard? No, Forgive me I thought I heard jingling when what I actually heard was jingoism.

Quasaire
WHen was this? I think Japan has the highest life expentancy but I haven't kept up with current trends.

Apparently because the depressing economy Japan has been experiencing, a unprecedented high crime rate has stroked Japan according to sources I read a few months back. Not that that has much to do with longevity though, or at least right now. Honestly, I'm not sure about the life expectancy statistics. I heard on some television program that Japan had the highest number of people over 80 years of age living. Of course, you have to recognize that Andorra's low population makes it proportionally incomparable to either the US or Japan. The stats on Andorra was from the year '98 (I believe) so that is a little outdate anyway.

I think we are more diverse than then the USA.

Actually I would say that the state of California alone is probably just or more diverse than Canada. According to the 2003 US Census Bureau report it is as follows:

60% = European origin
7% = African origin
1% = Native American origin
11% = Asian origin
32% Latino origin.

In numbers (Cali pop = 34 million) that is:

20.4 million
2.4 million
0.3 million
3 million
10.9 million

respectively.

I would consider Canada a close second. If you look here http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/ca.html and click "People" you can see the percentages.

Last edited by a moderator:
Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
British Isles origin 28%, French origin 23%, other European 15%, Amerindian 2%, other, mostly Asian, African, Arab 6%, mixed background 26%

white 77.1%, black 12.9%, Asian 4.2%, Amerindian and Alaska native 1.5%, native Hawaiian and other Pacific islander 0.3%, other 4% (2000)

What I was taking about was the mixed background population rather than the population diversity. Canada does not have the greatest ancestry diversity. I was just joking around and doing some jingoism.

Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
Originally posted by jcsd
Was that Santa Claus's sleigh I just heard? No, Forgive me I thought I heard jingling when what I actually heard was jingoism.

OK, I had to look that one up: Jingoism:: fanatical patriotism, an appeal intended to arouse patriotic emotions.

According to CIA:

Ethnic groups in USA:
white 77.1%, black 12.9%, Asian 4.2%, Amerindian and Alaska native 1.5%, native Hawaiian and other Pacific islander 0.3%, other 4% (2000)

Ethnic groups in the Netherlands:
Dutch 83%, other 17% (of which 9% are non-western origin mainly Turks, Moroccans, Antilleans, Surinamese and Indonesians) (1999 est.)

Not all that different huh? And I saw a television report on dateline yesterday which confirmed my believes. The general population has a 2-3% chance of having a child with a genetic birth-defect. When first-cousins marry eachother, the percentage goes up only by 2. So imagine if people more distantly related marry eachother, that is not going to make a difference.

Israel

Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
Originally posted by drag
Israel

? Anyway, Israel::

Jewish 80.1% (Europe/America-born 32.1%, Israel-born 20.8%, Africa-born 14.6%, Asia-born 12.6%), non-Jewish 19.9% (mostly Arab) (1996 est.)

Originally posted by Monique And I saw a television report on dateline yesterday which confirmed my believes. The general population has a 2-3% chance of having a child with a genetic birth-defect. When first-cousins marry eachother, the percentage goes up only by 2.

If I had any real way of knowing that this piece of information is indeed fact, then I would officially withdraw my initial claim and delcare you the winner of this argument. However, can I really trust the validity of unreferenced, second-hand information? I don't think so.

eNtRopY

BTW -- There is definately not near-equal levels of diversity in the Netherlands and the USA. You simply grouped all whites together for the US and neglected to mention that almost all whites in the Netherlands are Dutch. Also, you conveniently withheld the fact that most of the minority groups in the Netherlands come from just a handful of countries... unlike the US.

Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
Originally posted by eNtRopY
If I had any real way of knowing that this piece of information is indeed fact, then I would officially withdraw my initial claim and delcare you the winner of this argument. However, can I really trust the validity of unreferenced, second-hand information? I don't think so.

eNtRopY

BTW -- There is definately not near-equal levels of diversity in the Netherlands and the USA. You simply grouped all whites together for the US and neglected to mention that almost all whites in the Netherlands are Dutch. Also, you conveniently withheld the fact that most of the minority groups in the Netherlands come from just a handful of countries... unlike the US.

I didn't do anything with the information, I directly quoted it from the CIA world factbook. But you are correct in your comment.

Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
FIRST COUSINS FACE LOWER RISK OF HAVING CHILDREN
WITH GENETIC CONDITIONS THAN IS WIDELY PERCEIVED

http://www.nsgc.org/newsroom/release_040302.asp [Broken]

btw, this comes from the national society of genetic counselors so I guess they would know :)

Last edited by a moderator:
bogdan
I don't think "geneticaly superior" means having the greatest variety of genes...it means having the "best" genes...compare it to "hibridization"...if a "high quality" "plant" is "combined" with a low quality plant...the result is not too good...but if only the best plants are "combined" than it gives the best results...this is one of the laws of evolution...the mutation rate mustn't be to high...only the best chromosomes are to be selected...in America the mutation rate is quite high because there are people with very different genotypes...and elitism does not appear too often...but entropy is correct in a way...but only if we compare americans with small colectivities (like the Amish...)...not great ones...like countries...

bishwa
I don't think "geneticaly superior" means having the greatest variety of genes...it means having the "best" genes...

I'd better agree to this.

Moreover, i believe that genetical "superiority" can be applied only between two or more species.eg we "we(homo sapiens)" are genetically superior to the other organisms. But there can never exist superioriy(genetical) between a group of organisms of the same species.