Human Biology

Volume 86 | Issue 3 Article 5

2014 A Troublesome Inheritance: Nicholas Wade’s Botched Interpretation of Human Genetics, History, and Agustín Fuentes University of Notre Dame, [email protected]

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.wayne.edu/humbiol

Recommended Citation Fuentes, Agustín (2014) "A Troublesome Inheritance: Nicholas Wade’s Botched Interpretation of Human Genetics, History, and Evolution," Human Biology: Vol. 86: Iss. 3, Article 5. Available at: http://digitalcommons.wayne.edu/humbiol/vol86/iss3/5 A Troublesome Inheritance: Nicholas Wade’s Botched Interpretation of Human Genetics, History, and Evolution

Abstract Review of A Troublesome Inheritance: Genes, Race and Human History, by Nicholas Wade. New York: Penguin Press, 2013. x + 278 pp. 978-1-5942-0446-3 (hardcover). US $27.95.

Keywords .

This open access article is available in Human Biology: http://digitalcommons.wayne.edu/humbiol/vol86/iss3/5 book review A Troublesome Inheritance: Nicholas Wade’s Botched Interpretation of Human Genetics, History, and Evolution

Agustín Fuentes1

A Troublesome Inheritance: Genes, Race and Human History, by Nicholas Wade. New York: Penguin Press, 2014. x + 278 pp. 978-1-5942-0446-3 (hardcover). US $27.95.

umans are still evolving, genetic sequences (see Marks 1995, 2010). Rather are important, and populations of humans than actually acknowledging the copious, and cur- Hdifffer from one another in many ways, rent, scientifijic research on human genetic variation including patterns of allelic variation. These facts that contradicts his assertions, Wade reviews, and are not debatable; they are true—but none of them rejects, only the protests of Jared Diamond and are accurately discussed or represented in Nicholas assertions by Richard Lewontin. Wade does make Wade’s book A Troublesome Inheritance: Genes, minimal reference to the offfijicial statements on Race and Human History. race by the American Association of Physical An- Wade argues that there are defijinable and thropologists and the American Anthropological genetically identifijiable groups we can describe Association; he simply disregards them by reassert- and label as biological races in humans today. He ing his belief that looking at genetics gives us clear does not provide a consistent defijinition for what racial assignment. he means by “race” or a specifijic number of races Despite being publicly challenged by numerous that we have (he indicates three, fijive, and seven as biological anthropologists, geneticists, and evolu- options). Wade suggests that believing in biologi- tionary biologists on the specifijics of the data and cal races (especially African, Caucasian, and East his interpretations (see, e.g., Marks 2014; Fuentes Asian) is both common sense and solid science. 2014; Rafff 2014), Wade has been adamant in his He asserts that evolved diffferences in these races refusal to interact with any assertions, articles, are the key explanation for social diffferences in data, or analyses that in any way problematize his histories, economies, and trajectories in societies; simplistic, and erroneous, position. His approach why “Chinese society difffers profoundly from Eu- is particularly dangerous as his justifijication for this ropean society, and both are entirely unlike a tribal position is that he is a defender of truth and that African society” (123). Wade argues that it is racial a cabal of left-leaning academics are obfuscating (genetic) diffferences and separate evolutionary reality with oppressive, even fascistic, denials of histories that help us understand why humans are the truth about race. the way they are. Since the publication of his book, the core In making these assertions, Wade ignores the of Wade’s responses to his (many) critics have majority of data and conclusions from anthro- been that they (1) are trying to repress the true pology, , human biology, and state of knowledge about racial variation, (2) have

1Department of Anthropology, University of Notre Dame. E-mail: [email protected].

Human Biology, Summer 2014, v. 86, no. 3, pp. 215–220. Copyright © 2015 Wayne State University Press, Detroit, Michigan 48201 216 ■ Fuentes poor academic reputations and/or do less than as a result of the last ~50,000 years of human acclaimed work and are worried that their careers evolution. These points are both wrong, and I will would be derailed if biological races were true, and/ briefly outline why. or (3) “are heavy on unsupported condemnations of First, Wade’s botched understanding of genet- the book, and less generous with specifijic evidence” ics: Wade states there are defijinable genetic races (Wade 2014). but offfers no substantive defijinition. Wade uses None of these assertions are valid, and in fact, the words cluster, population, group, race, subrace, Wade is using them as a smoke screen to avoid and ethnicity without defijinitions and occasionally actual scientifijic debate on the claims made in his interchangeably throughout the book. He does book. And it works. Charles Murray, coauthor with assert that particular “clusters of variation” equal Richard Herrnstein of the controversial book The races but never gives a scientifijically assessable Bell Curve (1994), wrote a glowing review in the Wall defijinition for these “clusters”—he simply states Street Journal (Murray 2014) championing Wade that if you lump all humans by their genetic varia- as the voice of reason against a sea of left-leaning tion you get specifijic clusters, and that these clusters lying academics, and Jared Taylor of the hypercon- “always correspond to the fijive continental races” servative and openly racist magazine American (97) (meaning African, East Asian, Caucasian, Renaissance, congratulated Wade on his blow to the Australian, and Native American). fascist left that is academia (Taylor 2014). Wade thinks that a focus exclusively on the Wade’s tactic is particularly dangerous in the variation on coding regions of the human genome public arena, as many readers do not have access will get us answers. But he does not recognize that to the wide range of current genomic and evolu- humans have only about 19,000 genes (many fewer tionary data and theory and do not understand than many less complex forms of ) and that the complexities and rigor of the peer-reviewed even within these regions there is much variation publication process by which data are assessed and in structure. For example, Ezkurdia et al. (2014) disseminated. Wade’s line of obfuscation in this recently reported on a large collection of regions regard plays on the fact that most of the general of the genome previously thought to be coding re- public have little context with which to assess gions, concluding that “most genes in the potential whether Nicholas Wade, with his 50-year-old de- non-coding set have multiple non-coding features, gree in biology and no peer-reviewed publications little or no evidence of transcript expression, no or research experience, has the skill and knowledge detected peptides, and a reading frame conserva- set to engage with many of his critics who are tion that fijits non-coding genes more closely than current researchers and educators in the fijields on coding genes” (18). We know that “genes” don’t do which Wade writes. This is not to say that science anything by themselves; epigenetics and complex writers can’t offfer excellent and groundbreaking metabolic and developmental systems are at play contributions or that only experts in a given area in how bodies work (Buchanan et al. 2009). So can be participants in such discussions. It is to say while “genes” matter, they are only a small part that, if one does venture into a scientifijic topic and of the whole evolutionary picture, and focusing make very strong assertions about a complex data just on DNA segments won’t get you what Wade set, one should not avoid direct engagement with implies it will. those whose research and teaching are in that In the book Wade refers to a sampling of recent very area. genetic studies (including ~23 articles published But Wade does not engage; he avoids chal- since 2000) to support his “cluster of variation” lenges and presents a sloppy, erroneous, and highly idea of genetic races. But he repeatedly glosses over prejudiced view of human genetics and evolution. key points, misrepresents the fijindings in some of Wade makes two assertions that underlie all of his the studies cited, and wholly ignores an enormous arguments: (a) humans are divided into genetically body of literature that challenges his assertions identifijied “continental races” (or three, or fijive, or (see, e.g., Templeton 2013; Edgar and Hunley 2009; seven, depending on where you are in the book); Weiss and Long 2009; Xing et al. 2009; Marks 1995; and (b) there are signifijicant diffferences in geneti- among many others). cally based social behaviors between these “races” We know that humans all share 100% of the Review of Wade, A Troublesome Inheritance ■ 217 same genes and 99.9% of variation, and that the (how many clusters you get) can be rather arbitrary vast majority of DNA that varies is not in coding (see Rosenberg et al. 2002, plus responses and regions themselves and is not directly shaped by commentary). But Wade ignores this wrinkle of natural selection the way Wade suggests it is. We complexity, and in a clear example of his disinclina- know that most variation is due to gene flow and tion to engage with any research that complexifijies genetic drift, so the farther apart two populations his perspective, he ignores the argument in an are, the more likely they are to have more difffer- article he cites that counters his view of three (or ences (isolation by distance); we also know that fijive or seven) clear racial clusters by arguing for 14 most of the variation in our entire species is found clusters, six of which are in Africa alone (Tishkofff in populations just in Africa, with all the variation et al. 2009). found in all populations outside of Africa making Further demonstrating his ignorance about up a subset of that variation (Tishkofff et al. 2009). human genetics, Wade states in chapter 5 of his Diffferent populations do vary in much of the book that “it might be reasonable to elevate the 0.1% of the genome, but this variation is not dis- Indian and Middle Eastern groups to the level of tributed along anything one could identify as racial major races, making seven in all,” and he notices lines. For example, one of Wade’s core assertions of a problem: “But then, many more subpopulations notable diffferences in the three “races” of African, could be declared races.” His solution? “So to keep East Asian, and Caucasian comes from a study things simple, the 5-race continent based scheme by Voight et al. (2006) that used 89 Japanese and seems the most practical for most purposes” (101). Han Chinese individuals from Tokyo and Beijing, This solution is practical if one’s purpose is to 60 individuals with ancestry from northern and maintain the myth that black, white, and Asian western Europe, and 60 members of the Yoruba are really separable biological groups. But if one’s group from Ibadan, Nigeria. It turns out that there goal is to accurately reflect what we know about are some discrete diffferences in patterns of evo- human genetic variation, then it is not practical at lutionary pressures on DNA sequence variation all—it is flat out wrong. among these groups—and much more overlap Wade departs even further from reality when (more than 99% of the patterns measured are he tries to talk about . His argu- shared). But these samples are extremely limited ment is that our species emerged in Africa about with respect to entire continents and are really far 200,000 years ago (which is true) and that between apart (visualize Tokyo, London, and Ibadan on a 120,000 and 50,000 years a few small groups left Af- map). Of course populations vary, especially when rica, some heading to Europe and some to East Asia they are far away from one another—but that does (accurate but woefully incomplete). In his story not make them races. We could easily get this same these groups stayed reasonably separate for the kind of pattern of minute but present diffferences next 50,000 years (patently false; see. e.g., Temple- between populations if we compared samples from ton 2013 and a plethora of archeological research). Mongolia, Malaysia, and Sri Lanka, or Finland, Wade argues that “people as they spread out across Morocco, and Azerbaijan—but these do not reflect the globe at the same time fragmented into small distinct races. tribal groups. The mixing of genes between these Wade relies heavily on some reports that are little populations was probably very limited. Even based on analyses with the program Structure if geography had not been a formidable barrier, to support the argument that humans naturally the hunter-gatherer groups were territorial and divide into the continental clusters (which he says mostly hostile to strangers. Travel was perilous. are races). He relies on these few studies as the Warfare was probably incessant” (78) (also wrong; main support for his notion that there are three see, e.g., Fry 2013). He argues that these groups then (or fijive or seven) natural clusters of humanity. The followed independent evolutionary paths to the problems with the number of clusters provided by diffferent human races that inhabit each continent. Structure for varying data sets has been extensively Wade goes on to assert that “diffferent kinds of discussed elsewhere (see, e.g., Bolnick 2008) and society seen in the various races and the world’s are acknowledged even by the originators of the great civilizations difffer not just because of their program, who warn that the inferred value of K received culture . . . but also because of variations in 218 ■ Fuentes the social behavior of their members, carried down al. 2013; Fuentes 2013; Kendal 2012; Jablonka and in their genes” (41). Wade then suggests that it is Lamb 2005). the genetic diffferences (due to isolation and natural The bottom line is that evolution is not simply a selection) that are the prime explanatory factors process of natural selection shaping specifijic genes for why Chinese dynasties had such longevity, why (as Wade emphasizes)—and presenting it as such it was so difffijicult for the United States to instill is highly misleading. Contrary to Wade’s assertions, democratic social institutions in Iraq after the war, the actual data on human genetic variation and and why Jews have such high IQs. The only way his human evolution demonstrate that we do not have story makes sense is if you ignore the vast majority multiple continental races in humans, that we do of our paleoanthropological, archeological, and not evolve simply by genetic shifts in response to genetic data, and if you bypass what we know about the environment, and that we did not spend the ecological systems and human biological and social last 15,000–50,000 years as isolated, paranoid little evolution (not to mention history). Wade agrees bands of hunter-gatherers. Abundant, and peer- that culture and history are important but argues reviewed, scientifijic research clearly demonstrates that the real interesting stufff is in genetic influ- that Wade’s assertions are unequivocally wrong. ences on social behavior. Culture is a mighty force, Race as we use the term in the United States he says, but it is the genetic bases for our behavior (black, white, Asian, Latino, etc.) is a real thing, that guide peoples toward certain propensities. but it is a socially, historically, and politically cre- Regarding the races (whether it is three, fijive, ated and maintained reality, not a specifijic and or seven) and societies, Wade asserts that the dif- identifijiable cluster of genetic variation. Race is not ferences are due to the minor variations in human defijined by biology, but racism can have biological social behavior that have evolved within each race efffects, and understanding and confronting the during its geographical and historical existence: realities of race are important for our society (e.g., “The evolution of human social behavior was Gravlee 2009). thus diffferent and largely or entirely independent We do need more public discussions on race, on each continent” (135). He suggests that these but not those promulgated by Wade. We need to diffferences are based on diffferent races’ social engage, fearlessly and accessibly, with what the institutions, which are cultural edifijices resting on social and biological sciences actually tell us about underlying variation in genetic sequences. genetic variation, about race, about evolution and Setting aside the fact that these continental why it all matters. races don’t actually exist, such a simplistic ver- sion of evolution is simply not accurate. We know that mutation introduces genetic variation, which literature cited in interaction with genetic drift, epigenetic, and Bolnick, D. A. 2008. Individual ancestry inference and the developmental (biological growth and change reifijication of race as a biological phenomenon. In over the life span) processes produces biological Revisiting Race in a Genomic Age, B. Koenig, S. Lee, variation in . We also know that gene flow and S. Richardson, eds. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers moves the genetic variation around and that natu- University Press, 70–88. ral selection shapes variation in response to specifijic Buchanan, A. V., S. Sholtis, J. Richtsmeier et al. 2009. constraints and pressures in the environment. We What are genes “for” or where are traits “from”? What also now know that -environment interac- is the question? Bioessays 31:198–208, doi:10.1002/ tions can result in niche construction, which can bies.200800133. alter the way natural selection operates and create Edgar, H. J. H., and K. L. Hunley. 2009. Race reconciled? new ecologies, and in humans, multiple systems How biological anthropologists view human variation. of inheritance (genetic, epigenetic, behavioral, Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 139:1–4, doi:10.1002/ajpa.20995. and symbolic) can all provide information that Ezkurdia, I., D. Juan, J. M. Rodriguez et al. 2014. Multiple can influence biological change over time. Social evidence strands suggest that there may be as few as structures, cultural patterns, and behavioral actions 19,000 human protein-coding genes. Hum. Mol. Genet. can impact evolutionary processes, which in turn 23:5,866–5,878, doi:10.1093/hmg/ddu309. can afffect our bodies and behaviors (e.g., Flynn et Flynn, E. G., K. N. Laland, R. L. Kendal et al. 2013. Review of Wade, A Troublesome Inheritance ■ 219

Developmental niche construction. Dev. Sci. 16:296–313. wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303380004 Fry, D., ed. 2013. War, Peace, and Human . Oxford: 579521482247869874. Oxford University Press. Rafff, J. 2014. Nicholas Wade and race: Building a scientifijic Fuentes, A. 2013. Blurring the biological and social in human façade. Hufffijington Post, 27 July, www.hufffijingtonpost. becomings. In Biosocial Becomings: Integrating Social com/jennifer-rafff/nicholas-wade-and-race-building- and Biological Anthropology, T. Ingold and G. Paalson, a-scientifijic-facade_b_5375137.html. eds. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 42–58 Rosenberg, N. A., J. K. Pritchard, J. L. Weber et al. 2002. Fuentes, A. 2014. The troublesome ignorance of Nicholas Genetic structure of human populations. Science Wade. Hufffijington Post, 19 July, www.hufffijingtonpost. 298:2,381–2,385, doi:10.1126/science.1078311. com/agustin-fuentes/the-troublesome-ignorance-of- Taylor, J. 2014. Nicholas Wade takes on the regime. Am. Re- nicholas-wade_b_5344248.html. naissance, 2 March, www.amren.com/features/2014/03/ Gravlee, C. C. 2009. How race becomes biology: Embodiment attack-on-the-regime/. of social inequality. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 139:47–57. Templeton, A. 2013. Biological races in humans. Stud. Hist. Jablonka, E., and M. Lamb. 2005. Evolution in Four Dimen- Philos. Biol. Biomed. Sci. 44:262–271. sions: Genetic, Epigenetic, Behavioral, and Symbolic Tishkofff, S. A., F. A. Reed, F. R. Friedlaender et al. 2009. Variation in the History of Life. Cambridge, MA: MIT The genetic structure and history of Africans and Af- Press. rican Americans. Science 324:1,035–1,044, doi:10.1126/ Kendal, J. 2012. Cultural niche construction and human science.1172257. learning environments: Investigating sociocultural Voight, B. F., S. Kudaravalli, X. Wen et al. 2006. A map of perspectives. Biol. Theory 6:241–250, doi:10.1007/ recent positive selection in the human genome. PLoS s13752-012-0038-2. Biol. 4:446–458, doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0040072. Marks, J. 1995. Human : Genes, Race, and History. Wade, N. 2014. In Defense of A Troublesome Inheritance. New York: Aldine de Gruyter. Hufffijington Post, 29 July, www.hufffijingtonpost.com/ Marks, J. 2010. Ten facts about human variation. In Human nicholas-wade/in-defense-of-a-troublesome- Evolutionary Biology, M. Muehlenbein, ed. New York: inheritance_b_5413333.html. Cambridge University Press, 265–276. Weiss, K. M., and J. C. Long. (2009) Non-Darwinian estima- Marks, J. 2014. Review of A Troublesome Inheritance. tion: My ancestors, my genes’ ancestors. Genome Res. Hufffijington Post, 14 July, www.hufffijingtonpost.com/ 19:703–710, doi:10.1101/gr.076539.108. american-anthropological-association/review-of-a- Xing, J., W. S. Watkins, D. J. Witherspoon et al. 2009. Fine- troublesome-i_b_5316217.html. scaled human genetic structure revealed by SNP Murray, C. 2014. Book review: A Troublesome Inheritance by microarrays. Genome Res. 19:815–825, doi:10.1101/ Nicholas Wade. Wall Street Journal, 2 May, http://online. gr.085589.108.