Tag: Council for Responsible Genetics

  • Rethinking 21st Century Racism on the Way Home GeneWatch Council for Responsible Genetics Volume 27, Issue 2 (May-July 2014) Victoria Massie, Ph.D. Candidate Department of Anthropology University of California, Berkeley Returning home from fieldwork can be difficult when you find yourself caught between an unintended call back to your project and the impending reality that…

  • Who You Really Are GeneWatch Council for Responsible Genetics Volume 27, Issue 2 (May-July 2014) Robert Pollack, Professor of Biological Sciences, Earth Institute Professor, Adjunct Professor of Religion, Lecturer in Psychiatry Columbia University, New York, New York Patricia Williams, James L. Dohr Professor of Law Columbia University, New York, New York “International Biosciences offer a broad…

  • Tell Me a Story: Genomics vs. Indigenous Origin Narratives GeneWatch Council for Responsible Genetics Volume 26, Number 4, Religion & Genetics (Aug-Oct 2013) pages 11-13 Kim TallBear, Associate Professor of Anthropology University of Texas, Austin On April 13, 2005 the Indigenous Peoples’ Council on Biocolonialism issued a press release opposing the Genographic Project, which aimed…

  • The question of race is, at its core, a questioning of humanity itself.  In various eras and locales, race has been marked by color of skin, texture of hair, dress, musical prowess, digital dexterity, rote memorization, mien, mannerisms, disease, athletic ability, capacity to write poetry, sense of rhythm, sobriety, childlike cheerfulness, animal anger, language, continent…

  • Book Review: Race in a Bottle GeneWatch Council for Responsible Genetics Volume 26 Issue 1, March 2013 Lundy Braun, Royce Family Professor in Teaching Excellence and Professor of Medical Science and Africana Studies Brown University In Race in a Bottle, Jonathan Kahn tracks the contentious history of BiDil, the first drug targeted specifically to African…

  • What can DNA tell us about our genetic lineage, and where does it fall short? What explains Vy Higgensen’s multiple results from different testing sites? Flawed methodology? Partial truths hyped as definitive findings? Did the testing companies use different methods or deploy different reference populations – or both?