Reply to comment

Sorry to have missed Friday conversation. Here's a letter to the editor I sent to the NY Times about the article that served as background ...

Indeed let's start "explaining it better", as suggested by the geneticist Marcus Feldman ("In DNA Era, New Worries About Prejudice", NY Times, 11 November 2007).

Genes influence human characteristics such as susceptibility to diseases, athletic ability, and intelligence. They do not determine them. Genes are a starting point, the grist from which lives are built based on interactions with other genes, environmental and cultural factors, and personal choices. People should be seen not for their starting points but for what they make of themselves.

Genes are different in different people, reflecting in part one's ancestry. Differences in language or the music one also reflect one's ancestry. We take pride in our own ancestry and appreciate that of others (or at least we're learning to). Why should it be different with genes? Their diversity is just as beneficial to humans as is diversity of languages and customs. The differences among us enrich us all.

If we “explain it better," perhaps new information could help overcome rather than exacerbating prejudices. Genetic diversity is essential for our existence and future as human beings. Could we learn from that to value and enjoy human diversity generally, instead of denigrating people different from ourselves?