No Race To Run For
In Measure of Man, Stephen J. Gould demolished the widespread belief that innatebiology makes some races more intelligent than others. Now comes a far more fundamentaldenial: biologically speaking, race doesnt exist in humans. That revelation camefrom Alan R. Templeton, professor of biology in Arts and Sciences at WashingtonUniversity, when he analysed millions of DNA samples from global human populations thatshow patterns of human evolution over the past one million years. He found that most ofthe genetic variation is individual. Between-population variation is either too small ornot of the kind that marks a historical branching off a lineage. Templetons findingswere published in his paper Human Races: A Genetic and Evolutionary Perspective inthe fall 1998 issue of American Anthropologist, an issue almost exclusively devotedto race. "Race is a real cultural, political and economic concept in society, but itis not a biological concept," says Templeton. "There are (genetic)differences, but...for race to have any scientific validity and integrity it has to havegenerality beyond any one species. If it doesnt, the concept is meaningless."
New Side To Pesticide
Are you suffering from skin rashes, breathing problems? Pesticides could be yourproblem. A leading American scientist says he believes that the huge rise in pesticide useover the last half century could explain many illnesses, including cancers and birthdefects. Nicholas Ashford, professor of technology and policy at the MassachusettsInstitute of Technology and known for his theory of multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS),argues that people can become sensitised by exposure to one form of contamination so thattheyre then liable to be affected by a whole range of other pollutants, includingdetergents, traffic fumes and tobacco smoke. There is no known cure for MCS. Soundsfar-fetched? Experience of sheep-farmers in the UK bears out Ashfords fears.Hundreds of them have become ill after bathing their animals in organophosphate sheepdips. Symptoms range from fairly mild sneezing and runny eyes of dipping fluto muscle spasms, insomnia and over-powering fatigue. Some farmers say theyve beendriven to the brink of suicide.
These Mamas Need No Mammograms
IF youve been advised mammography all too often, nows the time to say no. ADuke University researcher says few women in their 40s benefit from mammography screeningsto detect breast cancer while many may suffer emotionally and physically from unclearresults. Prof. Donald Berry based that conclusion on a study of the findings of eightlarge clinical trials that compared women in their 40s who received mammograms with womenwho didnt. Berry found that having regular mammography from age 40 to 50 adds aboutfive days to the life expectancy of each woman screened. The risk of not having amammogram until after age 50 is about the same as "riding a bicycle for 15 hourswithout a helmet, or of gaining two ounces of body weight, and keeping it on," hesaid. Mammography screening is difficult in younger, pre-menopausal women because theirbreast tissue is often dense, and fat deposits are often diagnosed as suspicious tumors ina first screening. Berry says that often means requiring a second mammogram.
