<Africans are the most genetically diverse group of people
in the world and therefore it makes no sense to partition
medicine by race>
You said "This is fallacious for a variety of reasons"
I read your response but you have not yet convinced
me I'm wrong.
In the paper Peter pointed to
"the frequencies of certain allelic variants
or mutant genes among people who share a geographic
origin or culture have medical value" But by targeting,
say, blacks for a drug, you are not targeting a phenotype--
you happen to be reaching that subset of patients by
blanketing an awfully large and genetically diverse group,
pretty cludgy.
It seems to me, you might even be increasing
the risk for adverse events. I suppose if that is
the cheapest way to reach a disease phenotype, so be
it, but I'd rather see, say, whites or Asians groups
excluded for adverse reactions than all blacks targeted
because some blacks carry a gene or a marker.
<edit>
I seem to remember that the pop singer, Mariah Carey
claims to have African heritage. Yet, clearly, she
would be indentified as being white. Does that mean
if she develops heart disease she might not be offered
a drug that is targeted to blacks? Goofy. Biomarkers
for adverse reaction as well as efficacy make so much
more sense obviously. |
