Typological thinking in human genomics research contributes to the production and prominence of scientific racism.

Public genomic datasets like the 1000 Genomes project (1KGP), Human Genome Diversity Project (HGDP), and the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) study are valuable public resources that facilitate scientific advancements in biology and enhance the scientific and economic impact of federally funded research projects. Regrettably, these datasets have often been developed and studied in ways that propagate outdated racialized and typological thinking, leading to fallacious reasoning among some readers that social and health disparities among the so-called races are due in part to innate biological differences between them. We highlight how this framing has set the stage for the racist exploitation of these datasets in two ways: First, we discuss the use of public biomedical datasets in studies that claim support for innate genetic differences in intelligence and other social outcomes between the groups identified as races. We further highlight recent instances of this which involve unauthorized access, use, and dissemination of public datasets. Second, we discuss the memification, use of simple figures meant for quick dissemination among lay audiences, of population genetic data to argue for a biological basis for purported human racial groups. We close with recommendations for scientists, to preempt the exploitation and misuse of their data, and for funding agencies, to better enforce violations of data use agreements.

The Colonial History of Systemic Racism: Insights for Psychological Science.

The psychological study of systemic racism can benefit from the converging insights of "Black Marxism" and development economics, which illustrate how modern systemic racism is rooted in the political and economic institutions established during the historical period of European colonization. This article explores how these insights can be used to study systemic racism and challenge scientific racism in psychology by rethinking traditional research paradigms to incorporate the histories of race, class, and capitalism. Antiracism strategies that make use of these histories are also discussed, which include disrupting the psychological processes that sustain racist systems.

Decolonizing the midwifery curriculum: Jettisoning the Caldwell-Moloy pelvic types.

As faculty in two different midwifery education programs, we have stopped teaching the Caldwell-Moloy classifications of the female pelvis, as have faculty in several other US midwifery programs. In this commentary, we explain the rationale for this change. We review the roots of the Caldwell-Moloy pelvic classification and the lack of contemporary scientific support for either classifying pelvic types or using such a classification for clinical decision-making, and propose an alternative approach to teaching assessment of the bony pelvis.

The legacy of language: What we say, and what people hear, when we talk about genomics.

The way we "talk" about genetics plays a vital role in whether public audiences feel at ease in having conversations about it. Our research explored whether there was any difference between "what we say" and "what people hear" when providing information about genetics to community groups who are known to be missing from genomics datasets. We conducted 16 focus groups with 100 members of the British public who had limited familiarity with genomics and self-identified as belonging to communities with Black African, Black Caribbean, and Pakistani ancestry as well as people of various ancestral heritage who came from disadvantaged socio-economic backgrounds. Participants were presented with spoken messages explaining genomics and their responses to these were analyzed. Results indicated that starting conversations that framed genomics through its potential benefits were met with cynicism and skepticism. Participants cited historical and present injustices as reasons for this as well as mistrust of private companies and the government. Instead, more productive conversations led with an acknowledgment that some people have questions-and valid concerns-about genomics, before introducing any of the details about the science. To diversify genomic datasets, we need to linguistically meet public audiences where they are at. Our research has demonstrated that everyday talk about genomics, used by researchers and clinicians alike, is received differently than it is likely intended. We may inadvertently be further disengaging the very audiences that diversity programs aim to reach.

Juneteenth in STEMM and the barriers to equitable science.

We are 52 Black scientists. Here, we establish the context of Juneteenth in STEMM and discuss the barriers Black scientists face, the struggles they endure, and the lack of recognition they receive. We review racism's history in science and provide institutional-level solutions to reduce the burdens on Black scientists.

The ideological roots of Nazi eugenics in pathology and its pioneers Martin Staemmler, Ludwig Aschoff, Robert Rössle, and Georg B. Gruber.

This study examines the ideological roots of Nazi eugenics and racial hygiene in the medical field of pathology and its key figures Martin Staemmler (1890-1974), Ludwig Aschoff (1886-1942), Robert Rössle (1876-1956), and Georg B. Gruber (1884-1977). The focus is on their specific approaches to racial hygiene and its legitimization by pathology and its representatives. The study is based primarily on the scientific works and statements of these four pathologists on the content of racial hygiene and the impact of these contributions on Nazi eugenics and its practical implementation in the Third Reich. The paper provides three key findings: (1) Staemmler, Aschoff, Rössle, and Gruber each had a significant impact on the implementation of Nazi eugenics and the legitimization of the Third Reich's health and population policies. (2) They all proclaimed the superiority of the Volksgemeinschaft ('people's community') over the individual and pursued the major objective of ensuring Volksgesundheit ('national health') by preventing the spread of hereditary diseases through sterilizations. (3) The specific relationship to racial hygiene was different for each of the four pathologists: Staemmler had a direct vision of racial hygiene in a national socialist context, Aschoff was committed to the subject long before 1933 and used the Nazi rise to power to reaffirm and expand his position, Rössle and Gruber adopted racial hygiene ideas not until the mid-1930 s, but later radicalized their views and lent additional legitimacy to Nazi eugenics in theory and practice. (4) Albeit to varying degrees, all four pathologists bear some responsibility for the medical crimes that resulted from Nazi eugenics and the related policies. It can be concluded that Staemmler, Aschoff, Rössle, and Gruber made considerable contributions to the theory of Nazi eugenics and provided the much-needed scientific legitimization for the Third Reich's health and population policies.

Entre a divulgação científica e a eugenia tardia: rupturas e permanências na trajetória intelectual de Salvador de Toledo Piza Jr, 1898-1988 / Between scientific dissemination and late-stage eugenics: ruptures and continuations in the intellectual trajectory of Salvador de Toledo Piza Jr, 1898-1988

Resumo O artigo analisa as rupturas e permanências do ideário eugênico na obra de Salvador de Toledo Piza Jr., professor e geneticista da Escola Superior de Agricultura "Luiz de Queiroz". A partir da pesquisa documental sobre artigos, correspondências e anotações do ex-diretor do Boletim de Eugenia , investiga-se a reconfiguração da eugenia no contexto pós-1945, momento em que Piza Jr. passou a atuar como divulgador do evolucionismo. Conclui-se que Piza Jr. deixou de defender publicamente a eugenia na segunda metade do século XX, mas manteve a concepção racializada nos anos 1950, correspondeu-se com sociedades eugenistas nos anos 1960 e sustentou a interpretação hierarquizada de evolução humana até final dos anos 1980.

Abstract This article analyzes the ruptures from and continuations of eugenicist ideology in the work of Salvador de Toledo Piza Jr., a geneticist and professor at the Escola Superior de Agricultura "Luiz de Queiroz." Documentary research involving articles, correspondence, and notes from this former director of the Boletim de Eugenia investigates the reshaping of eugenics in the post-1945 context, a time when Piza Jr. began to publicize evolutionism. While Piza Jr. stopped publicly defending eugenics in latter half of the twentieth century, he maintained his racialized notions into the 1950s, corresponded with eugenicist groups in the 1960s, and supported a hierarchical interpretation of human evolution until the late 1980s.

How Neanderthals Became White: The Introgression of Race into Contemporary Human Evolutionary Genetics.

AbstractHuman evolutionary theory has a history rife with racial biases in what might be considered its distant past that can appear glaringly obvious from our current vantage point. Despite the recognition that as a social activity science is always vulnerable to such biases (and science that attempts to uncover human origin stories all the more so), commitment to the scientific method can lead us to believe that we have improved on, overcome, or otherwise escaped these tendencies in our contemporary practices, whether through scientific contrition, changing social context, or better training and composition of research teams or as a result of advances in technologies and methodologies. This article adapts the evolutionary biology concept of introgression, which refers to the hybridization and repeated bidirectional backcross exchange of information between species, as a metaphorical frame to examine science itself and to trace the ways in which historic race biases from earlier, disowned human evolution research have been retained and selected for beneath the surface of current genomic research today. It takes as its focus the sequencing of the Neanderthal genome, first announced in 2006 and refined since, and the explosion of scientific research comparing that sequence to present-day human DNA from individuals around the world to illustrate the ways in which current research questions and findings in comparative evolutionary genomics draw on and dredge up earlier biases, albeit adapted to and disguised within contemporary social relations and power differentials.

George Montandon, the Ainu and the theory of hologenesis.

In 1909, Italian zoologist Daniele Rosa (1857-1944) proposed a radical new evolutionary theory: hologenesis, or simultaneous, pan-terrestrial creation and evolution driven primarily by internal factors. Hologenesis was widely ignored or rejected outside Italy, but Swiss-French anthropologist George Montandon (1879-1944) eagerly embraced and developed the theory. An ambitious careerist, Montandon's deep investment in an obscure and unpopular theory is puzzling. Today, Montandon is best known for his virulent antisemitism and active collaboration with the Nazi occupation of France at the end of his career. By that point, however, he had quietly moved away from hologenesis. This shift has gone unnoticed or been left unexplained in existing research. This article reexamines Montandon's theoretical outlook and reasons for championing Rosa's forgotten theory. It argues that while Montandon's adoption of hologenesis arose from a complex blend of scientific and personal factors, his previously overlooked early fieldwork with the Ainu played a key role. In contrast, hologenesis did not inform Montandon's later public antisemitism.