Search

The relationship history of evolutionary anthropology and genetics is complex. At best, genetics is a beautifully integrative part of the discipline. Yet this integration has also been fraught, with punctuated, disruptive challenges to dogma, periodic reluctance by some members of the field to embrace results from analyses of genetic data, and occasional over-assertions of genetic definitiveness by geneticists. At worst, evolutionary genetics has been a tool for reinforcing racism and colonialism. While a number of genetics/genomics papers have disproportionately impacted evolutionary anthropology, here we highlight the 2002 presentation of an elegantly powerful approach for identifying "signatures" of past positive selection from haplotype-based patterns of genetic variation. Together with technological advances in genotyping methods, this article transformed our field by facilitating genome-wide "scans" for signatures of past positive selection in human populations. This approach helped researchers test longstanding evolutionary anthropology hypotheses while simultaneously providing opportunities to develop entirely new ones. Genome-wide scans for signatures of positive selection have since been conducted in diverse worldwide populations, with striking findings of local adaptation and convergent evolution. Yet there are ethical considerations with respect to the ubiquity of these studies and the cross-application of the genome-wide scan approach to existing datasets, which we also discuss., (© 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Humans settled the Caribbean about 6,000 years ago, and ceramic use and intensified agriculture mark a shift from the Archaic to the Ceramic Age at around 2,500 years ago 1-3 . Here we report genome-wide data from 174 ancient individuals from The Bahamas, Haiti and the Dominican Republic (collectively, Hispaniola), Puerto Rico, Curaçao and Venezuela, which we co-analysed with 89 previously published ancient individuals. Stone-tool-using Caribbean people, who first entered the Caribbean during the Archaic Age, derive from a deeply divergent population that is closest to Central and northern South American individuals; contrary to previous work 4 , we find no support for ancestry contributed by a population related to North American individuals. Archaic-related lineages were >98% replaced by a genetically homogeneous ceramic-using population related to speakers of languages in the Arawak family from northeast South America; these people moved through the Lesser Antilles and into the Greater Antilles at least 1,700 years ago, introducing ancestry that is still present. Ancient Caribbean people avoided close kin unions despite limited mate pools that reflect small effective population sizes, which we estimate to be a minimum of 500-1,500 and a maximum of 1,530-8,150 individuals on the combined islands of Puerto Rico and Hispaniola in the dozens of generations before the individuals who we analysed lived. Census sizes are unlikely to be more than tenfold larger than effective population sizes, so previous pan-Caribbean estimates of hundreds of thousands of people are too large 5,6 . Confirming a small and interconnected Ceramic Age population 7 , we detect 19 pairs of cross-island cousins, close relatives buried around 75 km apart in Hispaniola and low genetic differentiation across islands. Genetic continuity across transitions in pottery styles reveals that cultural changes during the Ceramic Age were not driven by migration of genetically differentiated groups from the mainland, but instead reflected interactions within an interconnected Caribbean world 1,8 .

Aims: To explore patient experiences in a large-scale primary care-based, preemptive genetic testing program. Methods: Patients who received genetic results from the initiative were invited to participate in an online survey 3 weeks postresult disclosure. A 6-month follow-up survey was sent to assess changes over time. Results: The initial survey was completed by 1646 patients, with 544 completing the 6-month follow-up survey. The following outcomes were high overall: patient-reported understanding of results (cancer: 87%; cardiac: 86%); perceived utility (75%); positive emotions (relieved: 66.8%; happy: 62.0%); family result sharing (67.6%); and satisfaction (87%), although analysis by demographic factors identified groups who may benefit from additional education and emotional support. Results-related health behaviors and discussions with providers increased over time (screening procedures 6.1% to 14.2% p  < 0.001; provider discussion 10.3% to 25.3%, p  < 0.001), and were more likely to take place for patients with positive cancer and/or cardiac results (39.8% vs. 7.6%, p  < 0.001). Forty-seven percent of patients reported insurance discrimination concerns, and most (79.4%) were not familiar with privacy and nondiscrimination laws. Concerns regarding discrimination and negative emotions decreased between the two survey time points (privacy issues 44.6% to 35.1% p  < 0.001; life insurance discrimination concerns 35.5% to 29.6%, p  = 0.001; anxiety 8.1% to 3.3%, p  < 0.001; and uncertainty 19.8% to 12.8%, p  < 0.001). These findings led to the development and integration of additional patient resources to improve program implementation. Conclusion: Our findings highlight patient experiences with and areas of need in a community-based genomic screening pilot initiative using a mixed primary care/genetics provider model to deliver precision medicine.

The concept of geneticization belongs to a style of thinking within the social sciences that refers to wide-ranging processes and consequences of genetic knowledge. Lippman's original use of the term was political, anticipating the onerous consequences of genetic reductionism and determinism, while more recent engagements emphasise the productivity and heterogeneity of genetic concepts, practices and technologies. This paper reconstructs the geneticization concept, tracing it back to early political critiques of medicine. The argument is made that geneticization belongs to a style of constructionist thinking that obscures and exaggerates the essentializing effects of genetic knowledge. Following Hacking's advice, we need a more literal sense of construction in terms of 'assembly' to give a clearer account of the relationship between processes and products. Using the 'assemblage' concept to explore the social ontology of genetics, the paper reviews three areas of the empirical literature on geneticization - disease classification, clinical practice and biosociality - to show that a new style of thinking has appeared within the social sciences. In the final assessment, the conditions that gave rise to geneticization are now obsolete. While it may serve as a useful ritual of debate, conceptually geneticization offers a limited account of the heterogeneity of socio-technical change., (Copyright © 2016 The Author. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

A new genetic study focussing on the degree of violence in criminals and using both candidate gene and GWAS approaches finds statistically significant associations of extreme violent behaviour with low activity alleles of monoamine oxydase A (MAOA) and with the CD13 gene. However, the alleles implicated are common in the general population, thus they cannot be causal, and only represent potential indicators of increased risk., (© 2015 médecine/sciences – Inserm.)

While human genetic research promises to deliver a range of health benefits to the population, genetic research that takes place in Indigenous communities has proven controversial. Indigenous peoples have raised concerns, including a lack of benefit to their communities, a diversion of attention and resources from non-genetic causes of health disparities and racism in health care, a reinforcement of "victim-blaming" approaches to health inequalities, and possible misuse of blood and tissue samples. Drawing on the international literature, this article reviews the ethical issues relevant to genetic research in Indigenous populations and considers how some of these have been negotiated in a genomic research project currently under way in a remote Aboriginal community. We consider how the different levels of Indigenous research governance operating in Australia impacted on the research project and discuss whether specific guidelines for the conduct of genetic research in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities are warranted.

This paper suggests that many of the pressing dilemmas of bioethics are global and structural in nature. Accordingly, global ethical frameworks are required which recognize the ethically significant factors of all global actors. To this end, ethical frameworks must recognize the rights and interests of both individuals and groups (and the interrelation of these). The paper suggests that the current dominant bioethical framework is inadequate to this task as it is over-individualist and therefore unable to give significant weight to the ethical demands of groups (and by extension communal and public goods). It will explore this theme by considering the inadequacy of informed consent (the 'global standard' of bioethics) to address two pressing global bioethical issues: medical tourism and population genetics. Using these examples it will show why consent is inadequate to address all the significant features of these ethical dilemmas. Four key failures will be explored, namely, • That the rights and interests of those related (and therefore affected) are neglected; • That consent fails to take account of the context and commitments of individuals which may constitute inducement and coercion; • That consent alone does not have the ethical weight to negate exploitation or make an unjust action just ('the fallacy of sufficiency'); • That consent is a single one-off act which is inappropriate for the types of decision being made. It will conclude by suggesting that more appropriate models are emerging, particularly in population genetics, which can supplement consent., (© 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.)

There is an increase in the amount of genetics research being conducted in both developed and limited resource countries. Most of this research is sponsored by developed countries. There are concerns in limited resource countries on how the benefits from this research are currently being shared or will be shared in the future. There is need for caution, to ensure that populations from limited resource countries are not exploited by being used as subjects in genetics research which is meant to benefit populations from developed countries. This paper addresses the issue of fairness in benefits sharing and argues for justice in the sharing of both burdens and benefits of genetics research. The paper responds to some of the issues and arguments in recent literature on the meaning and limits of the concept of benefit sharing in human genetics research.

This chapter provides an introduction to the Framingham Heart Study and the genetic research related to cardiovascular diseases conducted in this unique population. It briefly describes the origins of the study, the risk factors that contribute to heart disease, and the approaches taken to discover the genetic basis of some of these risk factors. The genetic architecture of several biological risk factors has been explained using family studies, segregation analysis, heritability, and phenotypic and genetic correlations. Many quantitative trait loci underlying cardiovascular diseases have been discovered using different molecular markers. Additionally, initial results from genome-wide association studies using 116,000 markers and the prospects of using 550,000 markers for association studies are presented. Finally, the use of this unique sample to study genotype and environment interactions is described.

In this paper, the author questions whether the research ethics guidelines and procedures are robust enough to protect groups when conducting genetics research with socially identifiable populations, particularly with Native American groups. The author argues for a change in the federal guidelines in substance and procedures of conducting genetic research with socially identifiable groups.

In this paper I appropriate the philosophical critique of Michel Foucault as it applies to the engagement of Western science and indigenous peoples in the context of biomedical research. The science of population genetics, specifically as pursued in the Human Genome Diversity Project, is the obvious example to illustrate (a) the contraposition of modern science and 'indigenous science', (b) the tendency to depreciate and marginalize indigenous knowledge systems, and (c) the subsumption of indigenous moral preferences in the juridical armature of international human rights law. I suggest that international bioethicists may learn from Foucault's critique, specifically of the need for vigilance about the knowledge/power relation expressed by the contraposition of modern science and 'indigeneity'.

A unique history and make-up of a population may make it an attractive research target for population geneticists and pharmaco-genomic investors. The promise of pharmaceutical profits and advances in medical knowledge attracted Harvard researchers and the company Millennium Pharmaceuticals to remote areas in Anhui Province, Central China, leading to international diplomatic disagreements about issues such as the ownership of genetic material and informed consent (IC). This article discusses the role of genomics and genetic sampling in China, the way it is related to population policies (the new eugenics), the national importance of genetic materials and the conflicts it led to between the Chinese government and Harvard University. Here many consider the Xu Xiping case as textbook example of ruthless Western exploitation of development countries, illustrating the cold rationality of science in the process of globalisation. Ten perspectives on this case show that this view is simplistic and contributes little to an understanding of bioethical issues important to the population actually donating the samples. Viewing the Xu Xiping case as the nexus of the intertwinement of international, transnational, national, and local interest groups shows how different interest groups make use of different units of analysis. It also clarifies why the same practice of genetic sampling continues under a different regime, and why the discussion about genetic sampling has shifted from a concern with health care of the poor to an issue of international exploitation, terrorism and development.

A key selling point of pharmacogenetics is the genetic stratification of either patients or diseases in order to target the prescribing of medicine. The hope is that genetically 'tailored' medicines will replace the current 'one-size-fits-all' paradigm of drug development and usage. This paper is concerned with the relationship between difference and justice in the use of pharmacogenetics. This new technology, which facilitates the identification and use of difference, has, we shall argue, the potential to lead to injustice either by the inappropriate use of difference or through the inappropriate failure to use difference. We build on empirical data from a detailed study of the range of options for the development of pharmacogenetics to present a consideration of the ethical issues that surround patient and disease stratification. In it we explore the ways in which the use of pharmacogenetics may lead to the creation of new, genetically stratified, forms of difference and new forms of injustice based on these divisions. We also examine the ways in which existing forms of difference and social stratification may interact with the use of pharmacogenetics. In conclusion, we suggest how an understanding of these ethical issues could usefully inform future policy discussions.

Population-based genetic research, including genetic epidemiology, shows tremendous potential to elucidate the role of genes as causal factors in complex and common human diseases. Like all research with human subjects, full realization of these benefits requires careful attention to its ethical conduct, establishing an appropriate balance between individual protections and the advancement of scientific and medical knowledge. This article reviews the growing literature on genetics research and ethics to describe some of the fundamental ethical issues in population-based genetics research, including research design, recruitment and informed consent, and dealing with research results. Its focus is on areas where consensus is forming and where future work is needed.

This paper examines an act of the Icelandic Parliament on health-sector databases. Both the legislation itself and the manner in which it was presented by the Government to the Parliament and the general public raise various questions about democratic parliamentary procedures, community consultation, autonomy, privacy, professional confidence, control of health data in hospitals and business relationships between medical doctors and biotechnology corporations. A major question to be asked is: In whose interest is it that such sensitive data are handed over to for-profit corporations? Furthermore, is it within the authority of the legislature to authorize politically appointed boards of health institutes to transfer such data without the direct informed consent of the patient and without the relevant physicians' having a say? Does experience teach us to entrust private companies with sensitive personal data? Should the Government be involved in the research policy-making of the biotechnology companies that have been given access to the genetic data of a population, or should the profit motive be the sole deciding influence? That is, should the interest of the shareholders of the companies prevail over the interest of underprivileged groups who are most in need of new methods or medicine to alleviate their situation due to incurable diseases? Or is the invisible hand of the market the only competent decision-maker? Finally, will the proliferation of databases containing sensitive personal data, such as human genetic data, limit our personal liberty?

This essay examines issues involving personal privacy and informed consent that arise at the intersection of information and communication technology (ICT) and population genomics research. I begin by briefly examining the ethical, legal, and social implications (ELSI) program requirements that were established to guide researchers working on the Human Genome Project (HGP). Next I consider a case illustration involving deCODE Genetics, a privately owned genetic company in Iceland, which raises some ethical concerns that are not clearly addressed in the current ELSI guidelines. The deCODE case also illustrates some ways in which an ICT technique known as data mining has both aided and posed special challenges for researchers working in the field of population genomics. On the one hand, data-mining tools have greatly assisted researchers in mapping the human genome and in identifying certain "disease genes" common in specific populations (which, in turn, has accelerated the process of finding cures for diseases tha affect those populations). On the other hand, this technology has significantly threatened the privacy of research subjects participating in population genomics studies, who may, unwittingly, contribute to the construction of new groups (based on arbitrary and non-obvious patterns and statistical correlations) that put those subjects at risk for discrimination and stigmatization. In the final section of this paper I examine some ways in which the use of data mining in the context of population genomics research poses a critical challenge for the principle of informed consent, which traditionally has played a central role in protecting the privacy interests of research subjects participating in epidemiological studies.

The research community is increasingly confronted with the problem of ethic responsibility. Ethic reflection might be integrated as a part of one's own research projects. This question is discussed against the background of Jürgen Habermas' discourse ethics, which considers the diverse state of being in the modern age as the basis. In this situation, the process of understanding ("Verständigungsprozess") the norms assumed to be valid receives extraordinary significance, since this process of understanding itself inheres authorizing function for the norms. Taking this philosophicial approach seriously, researchers have the specific responsibility not to perform the ethical judgement based on facts alone. Since researchers might be predestined to envisage the ethical implication of their own research at an early stage, they have the possibility to activate the process of understanding about relevant ethical norms themselves as early as possible.

Existing scholarship on population genomics has only superficially addressed issues of power and political process. Accordingly, questions of politics and governance pervade the analysis of three population genomics case studies that follow: the Human Genome Diversity Project, Iceland's Health Sector Database, and "Clinical Genomics" as defined by the Beth Israel-Ardais collaboration. An examination of these case studies reveals that the common law, U.S. regulatory law, and international law have not developed the political sophistication to make the traditional promises of biomedical ethics--respect for autonomy, justice, and beneficence--come to fruition. Further, comparisons of these projects illuminate three areas ripe for reframing--informed consent, expert ethical oversight, and commercial benefits. Four avenues of reform are suggested.

With the aid of data of frequencies of genetically determined blood group systems, the authors have tried to show the basic ethno-genetic directional patterns in Southern Moldavia and in the Dniester-Carpathian-Danubian region in its entirety. Blood Groups A1A27B0, RHESUS, MN, and KELL have been determined in six random samples from four Gagauz villages (n = 330), one Moldavian village (n = 101) and one Bulgarian village (n = 96). The analysis of gene frequencies demonstrates genetic homogeneity of the total Gagauz population. Statistically reliable differentiation is observed only for the RHESUS system. It is possible now to suppose that the haemotological types of modern Gagauz and Bulgarian populations have been developed on the basis of the Balcanic serogenetic types, partially transformed under influence of gene flow from probably Central Asian or other eastern centers. The position of the Moldavians on the serogenetic map of Europe is less certain, due to a considerable ambiguity in the allele frequencies of the various blood group systems. Founder effects may account for these observations. However, the genetic distance and cluster analyses carried out on the frequencies of the surveyed blood group systems have shown the affinity of Moldavians with the Romanians and Eastern European populations.

It appears that large-scale population genetic studies are the necessary next step in genomics research. Such studies promise to provide correlative data to permit researchers to understand the etiology of a vast array of complex human diseases. Simultaneously, such studies are increasingly seen as yet another mechanism for the developed world to benefit at the expense of the developing world. In fact, a recent World Health Organization Report suggests that "without explicit attention at the international level, the initial technological fruits of genomics are likely to consist primarily of therapeutic and diagnostic applications for conditions affecting large populations in rich countries." (World Health Organization, Genomics and World Health, 2002). In developed and developing countries alike, there are concerns that the pharmaceutical industry stands to gain at the expense of the population(s) from which population genetic data are derived. In light of the current interest concerning ongoing population genetic studies and an increasing interest by many countries, Canada included, in embarking on large-scale population genetic research, it is appropriate to consider the concept of benefit-sharing as a potential mechanism to assuage these concerns. It is the author's position that by virtue of common law equitable principles and developing norms in international law, including the Human Genome Organization Statement on Benefit-Sharing, that there are principled legal and ethical reasons to compel the sharing of benefits that accrue from the commercialization of the resulting data. Using the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity and the Bonn Guidelines as a model, I suggest that appropriate benefit-sharing mechanisms have been considered in the context of non-human biological materials and that these same mechanisms may be applicable in the context of international and intra-national population genetic studies.

This paper addresses the application of the ethical concept of trust and the legal and political concept of public trust to population genomics projects in Iceland, Estonia, and Tonga. Focusing on trust and public trust, the paper explores analogies between the genomics projects and the treatment of other common-pool resources, making use of the notion of trust as an ethical demand, derived from the works of Emmanuel Levinas and Knud Eljer Løgstrup. The paper discusses the degree to which the ethical demands for trust and public trust have been established and maintained in the three national population genomics projects.

Yousheng meaning eugenics or healthy-birth and youyu meaning good-upbringing are necessary requirements for the development of human beings and therefore of humankind generally. There are enormous ethical issues involved in eugenics. An important task or calling of contemporary bioethics and ethics of population is to discuss these issues in order for people, even people in different countries and cultures, to reach some basic consensus and have practical ethical guidance. Based on the practice of yousheng in contemporary China, this paper offers a Chinese perspective on ethical dimensions of eugenics. It will argue that individuals, as members of society, have a duty to provide society with healthy and normal children. Moreover, this paper examines the relationships between the aim and the means and conflicts between collective value and individual value, in yousheng.

Anthropologists were quick to recognize the potential of new techniques in molecular biology to provide additional lines of evidence on questions long investigated in anthropology, as well as those questions that, while always of interest, could not have been addressed by more traditional techniques. The earliest ancient DNA studies, both within anthropology and in other fields, lacked rigorous hypothesis testing. However, more recently the true value of ancient DNA studies is being realized, and methods are being applied to a wide variety of anthropological questions. We review the most common methods and applications to date, and describe promising avenues of future research. We find that ancient DNA analyses have a valuable place in the array of anthropological techniques, but argue that such studies must not be undertaken merely to demonstrate that surviving DNA is present in organic remains, and that no such work should be performed before a careful consideration of the possible ethical ramifications of the research is undertaken.

This paper questions the prevailing historical understanding that scientific racism "retreated" in the 1950s when anthropology adopted the concepts and methods of population genetics and race was recognized to be a social construct and replaced by the concept of population. More accurately, a "populational" concept of race was substituted for a "typological one"--this is demonstrated by looking at the work of Theodosius Dobzhansky circa 1950. The potential for contemporary research in human population genetics to contribute to racism needs to be considered with respect to the ability of the typological-population distinction to arbitrate boundaries between racist society and nonracist, even anti-racist, science. I point out some ethical limits of "population thinking" in doing so.

In the past several decades, biological sciences have been revolutionized by their increased understanding of how life works at the molecular level. In what ways, and to what extent, will this scientific revolution affect the human societies within which the science is situated? The legal, ethical, and social implications of research in human genetics have been discussed in depth, particularly in the context of the Human Genome Project and, to a lesser extent, the proposed Human Genome Diversity Project. Both projects could have significant effects on society, the former largely at the level of individuals or families and the latter primarily at the level of ethnic groups or nations. These effects can be grouped in six broad categories: identity, prediction, history, manipulation, ownership and control, and destiny.