Weekly Reflection Post for 10/13 Class

In “The Science and Business of Genetic Ancestry Testing,” Deborah Bolnick et al examine the limitations and problems of direct-to-consumer genetic ancestry tests.  At first, their discussion of these tests reminds me of Sarah Wagner’s ethnography on Bosnia in that technology is being used to return a sense of ancestry to a person and to recapture a history stolen by time or some heinous act like genocide or slavery.  Bolnick et al go on to show why these tests are unreliable at best and divisive at worst and to urge scientific experts to be more vocal about the issues surrounding these ancestry tests.

Charles Rotimi, in his article “Genetic Ancestry Tracing and the African Identity: A Double-Edged Sword?” analyzes the possible affects of ancestry testing on African Americans who lost their ancestral identities due to slavery.  He views the subject from a personal perspective since his wife and kids have lost their heritage in such a way.  Rotimi emphasizes that these tests can give African Americans a sense of “belonging,” a feeling that is very important and shapes all relationships and interactions a person has.  However, Rotimi explains that this sense of belonging is a double edged sword since it is hard to identify ethnic groups in Africa due to high rates of migration.  He also explained that the results of these tests could be more divisive than inclusive, since many ethnic groups in Africa are currently or have recently clashed.  What I found most interesting in his article was his discussion of whether genetics or cultural activities are a better indication of inclusion in a group.  For many who seek to belong somewhere with these tests, they may find themselves even more excluded since they cannot relate to the culture that is their ancestry—they are too far removed.

In her article “‘Race’ and the Construction of Human Identity,” Audrey Smedley investigates the history of racial identities.  She shows how race as cultural invention was not present until the colonization of the Americas.  She goes on to show how this social construct affects contemporary culture, focusing especially on how it has maintained the marginalization of the urban black youth.  What struck me the most from this article was how race in its modern sense has been a source of identity, a place to belong in a way.

In Duana Fullwiley’s “The Molecularization of Race: Institutionalizing Human Difference in Pharmacogenetics,” the author examines the genetic bases of race from their perspective of two research projects: Coriell and SOPHIE.  These projects are trying to find a genetic basis for race by analyzing specific SNPs.  What I found most intriguing about these studies was how they approached the study.  The researchers seemed to separate the subjects before testing their DNA and then only chose genetic markers that aligned with their prefabricated demarcations of race.  Also, many SNPs that were “identified” as racial markers were inconsistent between studies.  This goes to show that race as a cultural construct is present even in the supposedly unbiased field of science.

Kimberly Tallbear, in her “DNA, Blood, and Racializing the Tribe,” discusses how the idea of blood has become very important to Native American tribes.  What I found most relevant to our class was the discussion of the Kinnewick Man.  In this instance, DNA technology was used to assign race/tribal identity to the remains of a man.  In doing so scientists undermined the tribal oral histories of many tribes.