DNA Tests May Increase Census Count Of Multiracial Population(npr.org)
npr.org
DNA Tests May Increase Census Count Of Multiracial Population
https://www.npr.org/2021/08/28/1030139666/2020-census-results-data-race-multiracial-dna-ancestry-test-mixed-biracial
71 comments
I agree 100% with your sentiment about not caring about who your ancestors are.
I had a larger than expected percentage of African and native American ancestry but I'm not foolish enough to think it has any impact on who I am or my cultural biases.
We've all seen those moments where an American goes to a country like Ireland and tries to awkwardly connect with them on a cultural level. It's silly and embarrassing because they are dramatically less Irish than a person with zero Irish ancestry who was raised there by immigrant parents. Not unlike the fact that an African American person has vastly more in common with an American of European ancestry than they do with any person in Africa that shares their genetics.
I had a larger than expected percentage of African and native American ancestry but I'm not foolish enough to think it has any impact on who I am or my cultural biases.
We've all seen those moments where an American goes to a country like Ireland and tries to awkwardly connect with them on a cultural level. It's silly and embarrassing because they are dramatically less Irish than a person with zero Irish ancestry who was raised there by immigrant parents. Not unlike the fact that an African American person has vastly more in common with an American of European ancestry than they do with any person in Africa that shares their genetics.
tjs8rj(2)
It matters at least for your choices of diet which regulates your health.
I never used any of these tests, it freaks me out a bit to be in some database. That said, My family of origin did too and had a similar experience.
It's all a scam there are YouTube videos of identical twins taking tests from the major players.
The data science was flawed because there is no science or regulations. All these startups are winging it, it seems.
I never used any of these tests, it freaks me out a bit to be in some database. That said, My family of origin did too and had a similar experience.
It's all a scam there are YouTube videos of identical twins taking tests from the major players.
The data science was flawed because there is no science or regulations. All these startups are winging it, it seems.
If we don't have the data science to even know what peoples' distant ancestry is, how do you know it matters for choice of diet?
Maybe your ancestry per se is not so important, but your genotypes can reveal predisposition towards vitamin deficiencies.
For example, see https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5801754/
> Overall, the data analyzed suggests that ethnic-specific associations are involved in the genetic determination of vitamin B12 concentrations.
Disclaimer: I am a biology dilettante
For example, see https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5801754/
> Overall, the data analyzed suggests that ethnic-specific associations are involved in the genetic determination of vitamin B12 concentrations.
Disclaimer: I am a biology dilettante
Considering most of the population doesn’t eat very healthy and rates of B12 deficiency are only ~6% I can’t imagine it would make much difference what your genetics are. Especially since many cases of deficiency will be the result of medical problems.
> I never used any of these tests, it freaks me out a bit to be in some database
Use a fake name.
Use a fake name.
You do realize that a sample of your DNA could be traced back to you pretty easily, right? If a sibling or close relative was in the database it wouldn't take much to de-anonymize you
If a sibling is in the database, it is almost immaterial whether or not you directly participate.
Mine was normal except for one trace. That trace has remained, whereas the expected populations have been whittled to one area -- which is not where my family heritage is from on either side.
I have my doubts that the improved locations @ 23andMe are actually improvements.
I have my doubts that the improved locations @ 23andMe are actually improvements.
> However, I increasingly question why I should care about my ancestry and what it says about me.
I don’t personally care, but scholarships care, the government cares, boards care, universities care, employers care, etc and I otherwise look white but am really only half, so the few times I have been asked about it, the tests have been quite valuable.
I don’t personally care, but scholarships care, the government cares, boards care, universities care, employers care, etc and I otherwise look white but am really only half, so the few times I have been asked about it, the tests have been quite valuable.
Have you had to provide the results from a DNA test to any of those groups? I've never been asked to "prove" what I've self-reported, even though I do not look anything like what I am checking off as my ethnicity.
[deleted]
I haven't ever been challenged for proof, but typically provide it if anyone even questions it. Nobody demanded proof, but they questioned it, so I volunteered.
One came from a recruiter with a diversity quota who mostly cared that I would be consistent and the other was for a scholarship for people with Jamaican background.
One came from a recruiter with a diversity quota who mostly cared that I would be consistent and the other was for a scholarship for people with Jamaican background.
>since these stats just seem to be used to advantage
This is the problem though. If you can get into a better college, get a scholarship or get a better job because of it, then wouldn't you take advantage of this? I think a lot of people would.
This is the problem though. If you can get into a better college, get a scholarship or get a better job because of it, then wouldn't you take advantage of this? I think a lot of people would.
I think they're saying that it's hard to see why it matters or is interesting intrinsically (i.e., if you didn't get any advantage by claiming some heritage, why else do you care?).
Personally, I still find it interesting, but I agree that it is basically just a curiousity and has no bearing in my "identity" at this point.
Exactly. We are all the resulting mutts of hundreds of thousands of years of breeding. “Race” is just the result of where your ancestors most recently lived.
[deleted]
It's strange to see people lying/exaggerating about their racial diversity on census forms when under a century ago people lied about their racial purity on these forms to avoid being targeted by one-drop laws.
It seems like a risky decision to make, as if those laws ever return your entire family tree could be punished for that box you checked.
It seems like a risky decision to make, as if those laws ever return your entire family tree could be punished for that box you checked.
The difference is that now, the discrimination against non white people is mostly unwritten (biases that have measurable effects, but are never outright stated as policies).
Conversely all the discrimination against white people is formal (companies say they want to hire more non white people for diversity, government programs for minority owned businesses, etc).
So from a game theory perspective, the best possible position is one where you are informally perceived as white (so you don't face any of the unwritten biases) but are formally listed as a marginalized group (so you benefit from formal policies intended to help those groups).
Not surprising people who can, would use a DNA test as an excuse to put themselves in that group.
Conversely all the discrimination against white people is formal (companies say they want to hire more non white people for diversity, government programs for minority owned businesses, etc).
So from a game theory perspective, the best possible position is one where you are informally perceived as white (so you don't face any of the unwritten biases) but are formally listed as a marginalized group (so you benefit from formal policies intended to help those groups).
Not surprising people who can, would use a DNA test as an excuse to put themselves in that group.
>So from a game theory perspective...
The part you're forgetting is that is incredibly simple to prove you have racial diversity, you can just provide your DNA test results. But if you're formally listed as diverse, it is impossible to then prove you aren't.
The part you're forgetting is that is incredibly simple to prove you have racial diversity, you can just provide your DNA test results. But if you're formally listed as diverse, it is impossible to then prove you aren't.
klipt(2)
I think it’s more likely that increased population mixing will make everyone mixed race and we will have to find something else to talk about.
I can't see that happening. Race is a valuable tool in capital's toolbox of divisiveness.
> While partially based on physical similarities within groups, race does not have an inherent physical or biological meaning.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_(human_categorization)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_(human_categorization)
That doesn't really matter for the purposes of the comment you are replying to.
Since Wikipedia has been run by ultra liberals lately take everything you read there with a grain of salt when it is related to the culture war.
If race has no biological meaning, why isn't Rachel Dolezal (who was raised with multiple adopted black brothers) allowed to identify as black?
Isn't it seen as lying purely because of her ... genetics?
Isn't it seen as lying purely because of her ... genetics?
The only thing holding this back is the economic dominance of white people. There's nothing inherently favorable about being white except that, in most cases of human history, white groups have been the dominant economic actors throughout the world. I could easily see this being shifted to another race, i.e. East Asian, should the economic balance of the world substantially change.
> There's nothing inherently favorable about being white except that, in most cases of human history, white groups have been the dominant economic actors throughout the world.
Citation needed. South and East Asia have arguably been economic powerhouses for most of humanity. What we generally identify as white or western civilization has dominated economically during the past few hundred years, and arguably during the Roman Empire.
> It may come as some surprise to learn that, based on studies by the renowned economic historian, Professor Angus Maddison, the Asian economy accounted for nearly 60 percent of the global GDP before the Industrial Revolution which began in the late 18th century
From: https://www.boj.or.jp/en/announcements/press/koen_2015/data/...
Citation needed. South and East Asia have arguably been economic powerhouses for most of humanity. What we generally identify as white or western civilization has dominated economically during the past few hundred years, and arguably during the Roman Empire.
> It may come as some surprise to learn that, based on studies by the renowned economic historian, Professor Angus Maddison, the Asian economy accounted for nearly 60 percent of the global GDP before the Industrial Revolution which began in the late 18th century
From: https://www.boj.or.jp/en/announcements/press/koen_2015/data/...
> What we generally identify as white or western civilization has dominated economically during the past few hundred years, and arguably during the Roman Empire.
"Most cases of human history" was too broad. I was referencing since the age of exploration. The European colonization of the Americas, Africa, and some parts of Asia was the economic dominance I was referring to. My point is that it's actually fairly recent and aside from a maybe a few hundred more years of riding that wave, there's no reason to think white people will continue to be a dominant group.
"Most cases of human history" was too broad. I was referencing since the age of exploration. The European colonization of the Americas, Africa, and some parts of Asia was the economic dominance I was referring to. My point is that it's actually fairly recent and aside from a maybe a few hundred more years of riding that wave, there's no reason to think white people will continue to be a dominant group.
If and when you have 15 yo children applying to college, you'll understand this well. If you are Asian, you really understand it --
Ignoring justifiable attempts to increase diversity on campus, Asians find that being Asian American immediately docs points off as compared to White students. Of course I want to find the bit of white in me via DNA tests, so my child can get into a great school with, say, 2200 SATs (standard) vs the 2300 they would require as Asians.
Ignoring justifiable attempts to increase diversity on campus, Asians find that being Asian American immediately docs points off as compared to White students. Of course I want to find the bit of white in me via DNA tests, so my child can get into a great school with, say, 2200 SATs (standard) vs the 2300 they would require as Asians.
My wife's parents came to the United States from the Philippines. It's a very odd twist that our mixed-race children will benefit on their college admissions forms by checking the box for white.
Completely unfair. I would vastly prefer to walk into any college campus in the United States and be vastly outnumbered by Asians who earned the privilege to be there than to see them be more representative of the population as a whole by changing the standards for different groups.
Completely unfair. I would vastly prefer to walk into any college campus in the United States and be vastly outnumbered by Asians who earned the privilege to be there than to see them be more representative of the population as a whole by changing the standards for different groups.
The expected result from what you're describing is people claiming that they aren't Asian, but the article discusses more people claiming that they are multiracial.
Claiming or being Jewish would be the most advantageous to get into a top school. Way overrepresented ethnic group even accounting for higher IQ distribution.
What's even more disturbing is the fact that a lot of the justification of discrimination against asians, requiring higher test scores etc. is from none other than Ashkenazi Jews. Imagine the outcry if they were limited to be closer to their population percentage. If people actually cared about racism and being logically consistent, their first concern should be this massive overrepresentation of Jews. They don't.
South Park saw it coming:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w5F_AhciUy4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w5F_AhciUy4
So did Russell Peters (comedian)
"In the future there's gonna be a little brown in everybody"
"In the future there's gonna be a little brown in everybody"
Is anybody proposing we link the legal "racial/ethnicity" measures to DNA yet?
Just imagine how much fun the intelligentsia would've had with DNA tests say 150 years or more ago. They thought they had it with phrenology.
But of course, we're following the science, and can thus be confident of our lack of error.
Just imagine how much fun the intelligentsia would've had with DNA tests say 150 years or more ago. They thought they had it with phrenology.
But of course, we're following the science, and can thus be confident of our lack of error.
It would be fairly weird to have people self-identify in one field and force a genetics-based determination in another.
But once everyone's DNA is on file, imagine the easy time a new government will have after the next great political/cultural change (or the one after that) getting their country in order.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_and_the_Holocaust
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_and_the_Holocaust
I'm a "white passing" Hispanic. There is no material benefit, ever, from me declaring myself to be white. Applying to job? Applying to school? Always Hispanic. I've even had countless conversations turn around when I'm suddenly allowed to have a particular opinion, or discuss a certain topic, when it is made clear that I am Hispanic.
If I were a white person discovering any degree of non-whiteness in my genealogy, I would sure understand the appeal of clinging to it.
If I were a white person discovering any degree of non-whiteness in my genealogy, I would sure understand the appeal of clinging to it.
It's almost as if conferring special privileges and innate knowledge on people because of their group identity is absurd and creates silly incentives.
Yeah, as a person with a diverse racial background from Texas since before it was Texas (relevant cause of the opinion I'm getting to spout), you might be right that there "is no material benefit, ever, from me declaring myself to be white."
I personally think race is a wholly made up concept, so it's a bit vexed to add it into how institutions deal with folks.
What you're writing made me think about something that's omitted from what you're writing:
almost all of the benefits I've had from how folks interpret my race have come from -not- having to say explicitly how my race should be interpreted.
So, while I get what you're trying to say, where I live most racism exists in the unspoken assumptions about how people act. As such much of that racial bias is very difficult to point out to people because it's like trying to point out water to fish.
I personally think race is a wholly made up concept, so it's a bit vexed to add it into how institutions deal with folks.
What you're writing made me think about something that's omitted from what you're writing:
almost all of the benefits I've had from how folks interpret my race have come from -not- having to say explicitly how my race should be interpreted.
So, while I get what you're trying to say, where I live most racism exists in the unspoken assumptions about how people act. As such much of that racial bias is very difficult to point out to people because it's like trying to point out water to fish.
You're white-passing. There's no need to "declare" yourself white, everyone who sees you does it for you.
Also there's no contradiction between being Hispanic and white, so I'm assuming that you're saying that you have some ancestors who were here more than 600 years ago.
Also there's no contradiction between being Hispanic and white, so I'm assuming that you're saying that you have some ancestors who were here more than 600 years ago.
Don't Americans split off Hispanic status as a separate question? That's what I've encountered when filling in US forms...
There's plenty of white people in Latin America, and race is, if anything, much more rigidly stratifying there than it is even in USA. It's not a coincidence that if you visit Miami, you'd imagine Cubans were a fairly white-dominated population, but if you visited Cuba itself you'd find that's not at all the case.
There's plenty of white people in Latin America, and race is, if anything, much more rigidly stratifying there than it is even in USA. It's not a coincidence that if you visit Miami, you'd imagine Cubans were a fairly white-dominated population, but if you visited Cuba itself you'd find that's not at all the case.
Reminder that "race" is not at all a well defined concept genetically. Mixing genetic material across regions is the norm for humanity, not the exception. https://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2017/science-genetics-res...
"Race" as a social concept is still meaningful and I'm glad the US census measures people's self-identified racial categories. But it's a complicated topic.
"Race" as a social concept is still meaningful and I'm glad the US census measures people's self-identified racial categories. But it's a complicated topic.
this is so american and pointless... human races are not a biological thing, stop trying to make it happen. the U.S. is SO obsessed with race.
Please don't turn a race war into a nationalistic one. That's not the direction we need to be going here!
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
where i made nationalistic claims? i said that the racialist obsession in the US is a strong cultural trait, but it's completely unscientific
It's not a matter of "claims", it's about internet rhetoric, name-calling, etc. If you're posting trashy pejoratives about countries, that's nationalistic flamebait. Please don't do this kind of thing on HN:
> "this is so american and pointless" "the U.S. is SO obsessed with race"
- actually, please don't do it regardless of the topic is. We want substantive comments and thoughtful conversation.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
> "this is so american and pointless" "the U.S. is SO obsessed with race"
- actually, please don't do it regardless of the topic is. We want substantive comments and thoughtful conversation.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Genetic ancestry is not race.
For the 2030 census race shouldn’t even be a question. You won’t get any actionable data.
[deleted]
However, I increasingly question why I should care about my ancestry and what it says about me. I'm generations removed from those who arrived from foreign countries. I know less about what it means to be some of the ethnicities in my blood than those those that I'm not. I feel greater fellowship with others based on common interests than I do race.
Next census I'll probably write in "American" or "Human", since these stats just seem to be used to advantage or disadvantage people based on group identity, regardless of their actual individual situation.