Race is an important determinant of folate status

[marcus]

I haven't had time to read it yet. It's been an eventful week. If you say it's good, I will be sure to read it, you haven't ever steered me wrong.

I am entirely mollified and hope all ruffled feathers can be as well smoothed.
Am worried since I heard today your daughter has been ill, hope she's better now.

I cannot myself read that dog paper in a thorough way since I dont know enough. But I am able to look at the pictures and find entertaining parts.
The dog breeds are from all over and have interesting names (east african, japanese,...)
they start with 85 breeds of the 400 some they originally found out about from the dog clubs.
after DNA typing those 85 breeds they start to build the tree
It is very hard. They dont get very far. So far only perhaps a dozen
dogs are on the tree.

I am worried now that perhaps you may find it as entertaining as
I have led you to expect. It has a quality of being ludicrous and serious
at the same time (perhaps this happens with dogs).

 

[Evo]

Am worried since I heard today your daughter has been ill, hope she's better now.

Thank you. She is much better. She thinks she is invincible and that she can throw off any infection she gets without medical treatment. :grumpy:

I'm sure the dog tree will be interesting.

 

[Nereid]

Personally my obsession is with thought-police, not the issue of race as used in human genetics research. I dont worry or read much about race.

[...]

What has worried me is that there seems to be a coalition of people (might even include Nereid sometimes, even you, even Monique) so obsessed with race that they want to suppress the word. It is a little like proper Victorians being so obsessed with this and that they refused to allow those words to be spoken.

Are you still worried? If I may be so bold as to ask, how many of the posts (and associated links) did you read? What was it that lead you to form this opinion?

And almost without knowing it or thinking, almost reflexively, we are getting these combative reactions from otherwise very nice people like Monique. Or so it seems. Someone will come in with a study where race is correlated to body chemistry and simply post it----wham: a put-down.

Any other examples (Monique already said she'd made a mistake)?

Someone will comment on dogbreeds---how you get these huge differences in the dog resulting from just a little difference in the genes.
No, that's off-topic, or its wrong, or whatever.

Yes, it is OT, and those who said so gave reasons as to why. Are you saying that the reasons they gave for it being OT are inconsistent? derive from a 'thought police' approach? or did you examine the stated reasons and form your own opinion that they were irrelevant?

Besides being interested in intellectual freedom, I like to watch science.

[...]

And to me (as perhaps also to you) it is immaterial what they name the trunks and branches of the tree.
But notice that someone might name the trunks races!

Well, of course they might. And what happens to the pronouncements of someone who says "scientists cannot decide on the number of races, and race does not have scientific basis, and race does not exist!"

Well....we can say to that person this: "When you tried, by your method in 1970, you could not define races successfully, according to your system of taxonomy. When other scientists tried, in 1980 or whenever, they could not agree of the number of categories and they each came up with their own system. When you all tried, in 1990, to put human races into a tree-form and put it on a scientific basis, you failed. But do not say no one else can do it just because you couldnt."

Which, to sound again like a broken record, brings us back to where we started - if you (or BV, or Rushton, or Darwin) are going to use a concept in a scientific study - whether the evolution of the universe or the history and geography of human genes - you will need to develop a set of terms that are clearly defined, objective, etc. Whether you call one of those terms 'race' or 'dark energy' is somewhat arbitrary (tho' catchier names are better for marketing). However, for the term to be useful in your field, you need other researchers to adopt it and use it in a consistent fashion. Some time later - perhaps in your great-grandchildrens' time - scientists may come to realise that the term has lost its utility. Do you still insist that it be retained as a core term, and that those who say otherwise are just 'thought police'?

marcus, this 'thought police' thing really is bugging me - here's how I started the "Is there a scientific basis for 'human races'?" thread:

Race is clearly an emotive topic, especially when it's 'human races'.

There have been several high volume threads in Social Sciences where 'race' has been an important guest, for example:
Homicide Statistics by Race & Gender
Is IQ Really a Genetic Thing?
Why do people cling so tightly to racism?
My Thoughts On the Hereditability of Intelligence and Eugenics
The wealth of nations is mapped by their IQ

I would like to propose a discussion on the topic of human race(s). Given the heat such a discussion may generate, I would propose that the discussion be conducted within clear, pre-defined guidelines; a protocol if you will. (I proposed something similar a while ago in Biology - Are we in the midst of the sixth mass extinction?).

Unfortunately, I will have very limited internet access for the next three weeks. So, I propose the following:

1) An open discussion on the protocol, here in this thread (NOT a discussion of the topic!)
2) When I get back, I'll summarise the consensus, post the protocol, and initiate the actual discussion. Alternatively, if there's no obvious consensus, I won't do anything (except present a summary). Of course, every PF member is free to post what they wish, either in this thread or in a new thread (as long as it's within the PF guidelines).

Some resources which you may find interesting (or even helpful!):
What is the scientific method? - thanks to Russ for this
Genetic groups in the modern world - Jensen and Cavalli-Sforza, in the time of the human genome project
On-going studies into the diversity of the human genome

And last, a suggestion: definition. The word 'race' has many meanings, as used in modern English (whether the American, British, Singlish, or other variety). A discussion of the topic would likely benefit from wide agreement on a small subset - two? - of clearly defined meanings.

Could you please explain to me how my action in starting a thread such as this is consistent with your comment "What has worried me is that there seems to be a coalition of people (might even include Nereid sometimes, even you, even Monique) so obsessed with race that they want to suppress the word."?