Kimmelman J
Department of Social Studies of Medicine, Clinical Trials Research Group, Biomedical Ethics Unit, Faculty of Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Clin Genet. 2006 Nov;70(5):427-32. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-0004.2006.00706.x.
The following essay reports on the first session of a 2-day workshop on genetic diversity and science communication, organized by the Institute of Genetics. I argue that the four talks in this session reflected two different facets of a 'post-Human Genome Project (HGP)' view of human genetics. The first is characterized by an increasing interest in genetic differences. Two speakers - Troy Duster and Jasber Singh - expressed skepticism about one aspect of this trend: an emphasis on race in medicine and genetics. The other two speakers - Kenneth Weiss and Gustavo Turecki - spoke to a second facet of the post-HGP view: a recognition of the difficulty in translating genetic discovery into medical or public health applications. Though both sets of talks were highly critical of current trends in genetic research, they pulled in opposite directions: one warned about the role of genetics in stabilizing racial categories, while the other lamented the failure of any genetic claims or categories to stabilize at all. I argue that the use of racial categories in medicine seems likely to encounter scientific, medical, and social challenges.
以下文章报道了由遗传学研究所组织的为期两天的关于遗传多样性与科学传播研讨会的第一场会议。我认为，本次会议中的四场演讲反映了人类遗传学“后人类基因组计划（HGP）”观点的两个不同方面。第一个方面的特点是对基因差异的兴趣日益浓厚。两位演讲者——特洛伊·达斯特和贾斯伯·辛格——对这一趋势的一个方面表示怀疑：即在医学和遗传学中对种族的强调。另外两位演讲者——肯尼斯·韦斯和古斯塔沃·图雷茨基——谈到了后人类基因组计划观点的第二个方面：认识到将基因发现转化为医学或公共卫生应用的困难。尽管两组演讲都对当前基因研究的趋势提出了高度批评，但它们的方向相反：一个警告遗传学在稳定种族类别方面的作用，而另一个则哀叹任何基因主张或类别根本无法稳定下来。我认为，在医学中使用种族类别似乎可能会遇到科学、医学和社会方面的挑战。
