A post‐genomic surprise. The molecular reinscription of race in science, law and medicine
Abstract
The completion of the first draft of the Human Genome Map in 2000 was widely heralded as the promise and future of genetics‐based medicines and therapies – so much so that pundits began referring to the new century as ‘The Century of Genetics’. Moreover, definitive assertions about the overwhelming similarities of all humans'DNA(99.9 per cent) by the leaders of the Human Genome Project were trumpeted as the end of racial thinking about racial taxonomies of human genetic differences. But the first decade of the new century brought unwelcomed surprises. First, gene therapies turned out to be far more complicated than any had anticipated – and instead the pharmaceutical industry turned to a focus on drugs that might be ‘related’ to population differences based upon genetic markers. While the language of ‘personalized medicine’ dominated this frame, research on racially and ethnically designated populations differential responsiveness to drugs dominated the empirical work in the field. Ancestry testing and ‘admixture research’ would play an important role in a new kind of molecular reification of racial categories. Moreover, the capacity of the super‐computer to map differences reverberated into personal identification that would affect both the criminal justice system and forensic science, and generate new levels of concern about personal privacy. Social scientists in general, and sociologists in particular, have been caught short by these developments – relying mainly on assertions that racial categories are socially constructed, regionally and historically contingent, and politically arbitrary. While these assertions are true, the imprimatur of scientific legitimacy has shifted the burden, since now ‘admixture research’ can claim that its results get at the ‘reality’ of human differentiation, not the admittedly flawed social constructions of racial categories. Yet what was missing from this framing of the problem: ‘admixture research’ is itself based upon socially constructed categories of race.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In a postgenomic age, the resurgence of race in science, law, and medicine points to the resiliency of biological understandings of race within contemporary racial projects of science itself, typically without racially discriminatory intent.
“in a postgenomic age, the resurgence of race in science, law, and medicine points to the resiliency of biological understandings of race within contemporary racial projects of science itself, typically without racially discriminatory intent (Duster 2015).”
From Intersectionality's Definitional Dilemmas (2015) · cites this paper as Duster 2015
Cites
Gefitinib or Carboplatin–Paclitaxel in Pulmonary Adenocarcinoma
Mok, T. S., Wu, Y.-L., Thongprasert, S., Yang, C.-H., Chu, D.-T., Saijo, N., Sunpaweravong, P., Han, B., Margono, B., Ichinose, Y., et al. (2009) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa0810699 · Cited by 8,261 · see citing works
Global Estimates for Prevalence of Diabetes Mellitus and Impaired Glucose Tolerance in Adults
King, H., Rewers, M., & Who Ad Hoc Diabetes Reporting Group (1993) · Diabetes Care · doi:10.2337/diacare.16.1.157 · Cited by 886 · see citing works
Inclusion: The Politics of Difference in Medical Research
Epstein, S. (2007) · doi:10.7208/chicago/9780226213118.001.0001 · Cited by 792 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Intersectionality's Definitional Dilemmas
Collins, P. H. (2015) · Annual Review of Sociology · doi:10.1146/annurev-soc-073014-112142 · Cited by 2,419 · see citing works
Maglo, K. N., Mersha, T. B., & Martin, L. J. (2016) · Frontiers in Genetics · doi:10.3389/fgene.2016.00022 · Cited by 106 · see citing works
- Authors
- Duster, T.
- Affiliations
- New York University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Duster, Troy
- ORCID
- Duster, Troy
- Venue
- The British Journal of Sociology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2015-03
- Volume
- 66
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 1-27
- ISSN
- 0007-1315 (ISSN-L)
- 1468-4446
- OpenAlex
- W1837452863
- Cited by
- 226
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2026: 10 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 50 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 34 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 1
- FWCI
- 11.91
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- British Journal of Sociology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Race, Genetics, and Society
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History › Medical History and Research
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Philosophy and History of Science
- Keywords
- race, genetic ancestry testing, genetic ancestry, social construction of race, forensic genetics, personal identification, genetic privacy, personalized medicine, pharmacogenomics, genetic markers, Human Genome Project, racial classification, law and medicine
- MeSH terms
- Humans, Jurisprudence, Medicine, Molecular Biology, Science, Social Responsibility, Sociology, Medical, Genetic Variation, Human Genome Project, Racial Groups, Health Status Disparities
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review