Genomics Has a Diversity Problem
Vložit
- čas přidán 2. 06. 2019
- Someday, the information in our genome could transform healthcare as we know it, but one major hurdle we have to get over is the lack of diversity in our studies.
Skillshare is offering SciShow viewers two months of unlimited access to Skillshare for free! Try it here: skl.sh/scishow-15
#genomics #science #research #STEM
Hosted by: Stefan Chin
SciShow has a spinoff podcast! It's called SciShow Tangents. Check it out at www.scishowtangents.org
----------
Support SciShow by becoming a patron on Patreon: / scishow
----------
Huge thanks go to the following Patreon supporters for helping us keep SciShow free for everyone forever:
Adam Brainard, Greg, Alex Hackman, Sam Lutfi, D.A. Noe, الخليفي سلطان, Piya Shedden, KatieMarie Magnone, Scott Satovsky Jr, Charles Southerland, Patrick D. Ashmore, charles george, Kevin Bealer, Chris Peters
----------
Looking for SciShow elsewhere on the internet?
Facebook: / scishow
Twitter: / scishow
Tumblr: / scishow
Instagram: / thescishow
----------
Sources:
ghr.nlm.nih.gov/primer/precis...
www.yalemedicine.org/stories/...
ghr.nlm.nih.gov/primer/precis...
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/arti...
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NB...
journals.plos.org/plosmedicin...
www.ucsf.edu/news/2015/12/401...
www.healthaffairs.org/doi/abs...
www.cdc.gov/tuskegee/timeline...
www.cdc.gov/minorityhealth/CH...
www.kff.org/disparities-polic...
www.nap.edu/read/24624/chapter/5
www.genome.gov/about-genomics...
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/arti...
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/arti...
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/arti...
www.sciencedaily.com/releases...
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/grc/human
www.nature.com/articles/s4158...
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NB...
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/arti...
www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056...
www.technologyreview.com/s/61...
www.ucsf.edu/news/2016/05/402...
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/arti...
www.cell.com/abstract/S0092-8...
www.nature.com/articles/s4146...
allofus.nih.gov/
www.genomeasia100k.com/
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/arti...
www.healthaffairs.org/doi/abs...
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/arti...
www.ashg.org/press/201904-hgsi...
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/arti...
Skillshare is offering SciShow viewers two months of unlimited access to Skillshare for free! Try it here: skl.sh/scishow-15
0:56 Ya, we need to focus more research on those blue people!
💩💩💩
So you're telling me the fact that I'm not white might potentially be fu••ing with doctors ability to correctly diagnose me???
*TELL ME SOMETHING I DON'T KNOW!*
Hey @SciShow - "white people" aren't really a thing.... like... albino africans exist (but you're not talking about them when you say "white people" - even though they're people who are white)... whole villages in India and the Caucasus region look like white people but have very different genetic characteristics.
If you're going to be a science show - be a science show - and don't get bogged down in this fallacious common language... or these unhealthy ideas.
Western Europeans are a thing... white people... er.... not so much.
@@TheNeoLoneWolf Believe it or not, there is actually a story of blue people existing, but they were actually just a mutant form of European. Basically it was found that their blood failed to carry the proper amount of oxygen making their skin turn blue. A doctor later devised a shot which seemed to cure the disease. It's one of those odd stories in Mysteries at the Museum. Gotta love weird history.
owlcation.com/humanities/Blue-People-in-Kentucky-A-True-Story-of-a-Family-with-Blue-Skin
As a stem cell researcher, I can tell you that people indeed sometimes react differently to certain drugs. 6-mercaptopurine for instance is a very effective drug to treat children who suffer from leukemia. However, if a child has a certain gene variation in NUDT15 this drug becomes toxic and life-threatening (the frequency of this gene variation varies between different ethnic groups). Analyzing this gene in children before giving them 6-mercaptopurine therefore is very important (but commonly not done)! Although I have a small CZcams channel, I'm planning to make a video about this topic to spread awareness!
Your channel is now one subscriber bigger.
@SoftserveSodium who's shaming who?
Your channel looks interesting and I plan on watching your cancer vaccine video. You also make a really interesting point that I’ve never really thought about. I hope you make that video :)
Your smart
wrr
Hey, really crucial recommendation here: number your sources in your video and description. Like so they can see this please. This is supposed to be the norm for educational channels. Thanks.
While that would be quite a bit more work, that would indeed be much better! That way you can check specific statements, without having to go through all the sources.
Not just educational channels, literally any channel working with sources. Like.. If that German musician tearing apart the biggest german political party can do it in an hour long video just by himself, a channel like SciShow should be easily able to do this as well...
There aren't any reasonable sources to these claims. This is just liberal b.s.
@@Maxfr8 they are literally listed in the description.
The amount of sources cited makes this kinda unworkable
I don't understand why this is controversial. We need more data. We don't have that data. Therefore, we should try to get more data. Simple as that.
this needs to be pinned to this video. the comment section is a cluster.
@@DK-td2sh When was that said in the video?
J.J. Shank
It's controversiam because there is no "we". Some people needs more diverse data, some others don't. And those who don't are the ones who are apparently supposed to pay for it.
Because reactionarys and conservative like feelings over facts so they feel as if discrimination isn't a thing so they refuse to swallow that truth.
My dentist happens to be a black person. Once I told him that I did 23andme and he told me that you shouldn't have given your DNA to the government. It's not my fault that he thinks like that. I would be more than happy that he participate :) but I think that won't happen :(
There are way more non European people and countries than European people and countries in the world. Just go to all the non-European countries and gather all the genetic data from their labs and scientists.
Sadly only Europe, the Americas, China, Korea and Japan have large enough databases, the other countries are lagging behind in this research, understandably.
Also, European populations aren't as monolithic as Americans often think. Southern Europeans and Northern Europeans are really different in many characteristics. And Southern Europeans, while considered technically "white" are underepresented (Still not as much as people of African or Asian ancestry though).
@@hliask903 This is true. Also, back in the USSR days there were many, many medical studies and innovations that included Slavs. But since the fall, and innovation in new medical and genetics science, Slavs are not being included as much in mainstream studies anymore.
It's quite difficult to research when most major genetics research organizations are in 5 or 6 countries. (Germany, US, Canada, UK, China, Japan, and a little less so in France)
@@Azknowledgethirsty how is that Europe, the Americas, China, Korea or Japans fault? They can make their own databases. It's not like any of the mentioned countries are preventing the others from researching.
@@freman I didn't say it's anyone's fault, this kind of thinking implies that there are good and bad countries when in reality its just natural selfish behavior, I never claimed that they're unethical
Look I love SciShow, but sometimes the sources list is really difficult to sort through. Even if you don't number it, could you at least separate the links by subject? Many links don't show the topic in the address. I know Kurztezart (omg ik I didn't spell that right but you know what I mean ^^;) does that.
y it's kurzgesagt
Thanks Li. I completely agree
I think most sources don't address everything they say, but specific points. Like when they say that there's been a demographic bias, there's maybe one source for just that claim. Then when they say there's not much diversity amongst researchers, they have a source just for that. And finally when they say there's a lack of data on other genetic groups, then they have a source (or a few) for that.
And then only the video brings it all together into one, like if you were writing a paper
@@lucas29476 hey there's someone on my scioly team has the exact same name as you! Small world huh
More data is more good
just dont give it to beurocrats
Two words: Henrietta Lacks.
Immortality has its drawbacks
I really thought they were going to mention her. Getting consent is a moral obligation, not a matter of choice
@@azmanabdula You do know that woman died from cancer, right?
@@limiv5272 Yeah he just meant that her cells are immortal and still widely used in research. Still kinda distasteful though. She didn't have a say in any of that.
a hero
I mean, there are countries outside of Europe/US that have medical studies. Is it just not sufficient to make up for the data?
Zimbabwe isn't exactly full of highly trained and educated scientists with access to the tools to perform genetic testing.
@@Draolord11 "Best economy in Africa" is like saying "Dryest fish in the ocean"
Jonathan Bowen So you expect people of color from Western countries to fly to countries in Asia and Africa to receive medical attention because their own countries failed to do proper research that would include more than just white people?
I'm mixed race, so a study done in Kenya wouldn't help much, but studying 37 million black people in the USA would. . .
Other countries often just don't have enough funding for this kind of thing. Hopefully the progressively reduced costs will help even things out in the future
Stefan: "It's just that different individuals have different differences."
Me: *Pretends to understand*
he means that each individual only varies a little, but what exactly varies is different in each person. For one person the variation could be in a gene to do with blood cell production, for example, and in another person the variation is in a gene related to eyesight. Different populations could be more prone to different types of variation.
If I only have different eye color than what's in the reference genome and you only have a different skin color, we have different differences, but both of our differences are not represented and we have few differences. But if you count the number of possible differences you can find it can add up to a big amount.
So instead of focusing on race, we should just expand the sample size with random selection.
@@violet-trash
nope, because some groups can have more of those similar differences and it might be (medically) important to know.
Did you even watch (listen) the video? 🤔
@@aleka.. Yes, he stated that there wasn't specific genetic differences between races, just differences between individuals. Are you sure _you_ watched (or listened to) the video? 😉
As a scientific researcher who is also a POC? This video is GREAT!!!
I read that as "Eugenics has a Diversity Problem"
It's ironically one of the more diversely held ideas in human history.
Dein Fuhrer is dissapoint.
That is exactly why this video exists, to highlight that problem.
pskn s infeiror
genomics is eugenics?
I did :O when I saw the source list in the description.
Damn!
it is like the research is done by them with all the money
"all the(ir) money"? is that what you meant to say ?
Why am I receiving a notification for a video that's been out for a week, on a channel I'm not subscribed to?
* insert confused Jackie Chan *
This is still *SciShow*, right? Recent videos are starting to make me wonder.
Why?
When i first thought of the possibility of this happening i then thought "naw those people are way smarter than i am there is no way they would leave such a huge variable twisting in the wind." Glad the world is much worse off than my child brain imagined it would be.
I'm happy to see this wasn't sponsored by a genetic testing service. Opt-in paid services can't be making the register more balanced.
It's important to note that those genetic profiling services don't sequence genomes, they use microarrays. This means they're only looking at a small portion of the genome, and they can only find the types of variations they're looking for. Therefore their data can't be used for studies trying to get new information about whole genomes.
While it would be beneficial to include more diverse populations in the research, most of the main research locations are in countries dominated by people of European ancestry. In our current era of history, most of the non-European dominated countries are too poor to contribute much to the research. It's a matter of resource allocation. Our focus should be on incorporating those groups into studies while minimizing the extra cost of resources.
Makem12 that doesn’t explain why the US has this problem. People of color are treated differently. It is well documented that people of color pain isn’t taken as serious of white people. Racism still is influencing the medical world.
Makem12 I work in genetic research and there is currently a huge emphasis being placed on filling these gaps in knowledge - it’s made difficult by importation laws and the regulation and protection of human subjects
I think you are confused about how diverse the US and Europe are. Minorities aren't some strange phenomenon that you hear legends about but never witness.
Hell, most of our research is done in big cities. Chicago is only 31% non-Hispanic white, LA is 29%, 35% in New York, 36% in Atlanta, and so on. They absolutely have access to racial minorities. They just have history, outreach, and methodological issues causing racial bias.
So... You are saying that race and ethnicity are in fact a thing?
Chris Bryer race is a social construct. It’s a political category. Genetics is real. Race is not even a genetics term. Just look how race is used throughout history and it becomes incredibly obvious.
@@TheJuanTrueKaiser trying to explain it to these smooth brained people is frivolous, just direct them to creators.
Haploid groups are real, and in biology are generally just called races. They are not however anything like the laments idea of races.
For example: There’s some groups of black people on islands off the coast of india that are more closely related to tibetans and the ainu than any other group. According to the laments idea of races they’re black, so they’re closely related to black people, but that’s that true. What group goes in which “race” is far more difficult to tell than most people can accomplish.
There’s also how race impacts the people. And for the most part: It doesn’t. It impacts things like diseases, but most things like intelligence and behaviour have no good evidence that they’re related. As far as science is concerned intelligence is related to education and behaviour is related to a list of factors like education and economic status.
@@TheJuanTrueKaiser Its more complicated then that. Just cuz race it a broad term and has become problematic does not mean its not real.
@@greymind9815 That was extremely rude. What the hell is your problem?
So you're saying all races of humans AREN'T the same?
It might be because you use ancestry.com instead of tinder, but typically individual members within a species do have genetic differences. Only morons (& strawmen) claim otherwise.
@@FantasyUnited04 I was going to respond to this but I can't beat that savagery
Not understanding that a species can be diverse without that causing massive differences within said species, like differences in behaviour and intelligence, is just proving that you don’t care about actual science.
Human populations within different areas and that breed with different groups are gonna end up having differences like what diseases impact them and how; but if they all have mostly the same problems like how to get food, clean water, and shelter, then they’ll not see any major genetically caused differences in intelligence or behaviour.
they're not "races", they're ethnicities
ethnic groups are different
@@WrathAdaft519 ah yes the difference in intelligence between a golden retriever and chinchilla is exactly the same as the differences between a black person and a white person. Now I get it, the reason that I struggle with quantum mechanics is because somewhere in my ancestry I just have some black people dna in me
Is anyone surprised by this?
No, but it's still important to talk about this
Problem: Black people aren't taking DNA tests
Solution: Replace researchers with black people.
*CONFUSED*
There's no way this comment section is going to be civil.
Would help if people watched the video instead of judging it by the word "diversity".
From what I've seen it seems fine. In fact a lot of comments are like yours, pointing out that they think the comment section is going to be a shitshow. I guess a scishow intern is on point removing the rude comments.
@@mickles1975 Which makes the disproportionate amount of dislikes even more baffling.
You shouldn't have to be civil with reactionaries, there smooth brained subhuman afterall.
@@mickles1975 If they're suppressing ideas by removing comments I'm out. Surely SciShow wouldn't be that Draconic.
Is this research mostly done in America?
While I don't really know, I'd bet there's a lot of research going on in Europe. Americans tend to forget that "western civilization" doesn't equal USA
Most medical research is done in Europe (East and West), and the Americas. More recently China, Korea and Japan have gotten involved and have some big research groups.
Arabs, Indians, Native Americans, Austr aborigines, polynesians and Africans (who are really multiple very different genetic groups) don't have their own major medical research organizations so it's rare to see many medical studies include them.
With the socialized medicine of Europe, medical research there focuses on cures and cost-effectiveness. With the mercenary medical system in the US, most research is focused on patentable treatments. Honestly, I'm glad we have both.
Most advanced medical research is done in America(yes).
*sees the like/dislike ratio* : Poor Olivia, why does she get so much unwarranted hate?
*hears Stefan's voice* : wait a minute, what's going on here?!?
*reads the title* : oh, the **D** word... at least the comment section will be fun!
We all know why they hate her. And those people can go have a second stroke.
@@greymind9815 why do people hate her?
@B-1LL more like her voice
@B-1LL and she could still pull more game then you incel.
Julia's the only one that could've pulled this video off
European descent is quite vague in and of itself. Europe is fairly diverse with variations depending on where you live. Northern Europe, Eastern Europe, Southern Europe and Western Europe all have some distinctive traits.
Ikajo you are missing the point entirely, while not every European is the same looking at the differences between Europeans vs the differences of other cultures evolved from other parts of the world in comparison is massive, what works for Europeans won’t necessarily work for Africans and Asians
While Europeans are all different they undeniably have some similar genetic lineage that the rest of the world doesn’t have any connection to
You know exactly what he meant. Pale White folks. Anglo Saxons. From britain to germany to finland. Not the tan whites that get reminded theyre outsiders of arab descent when they piss the wrong person off. *most whites in america are german and british descent. they used to call them WASP, white anglo saxon protestants before they started letting other europeans into the white society in the early 1900s
@@therainbowsonicbrony I'm not missing the point, I understand it perfectly well. What I'm saying is that European descent is not one-size fit all. Of course more diversity is needed. I'm all for it. But a Norwegian person won't have the same genes as a Spanish person who won't have the same genes as a Bulgarian.
@@elreytriton Except that is not accurate. You can't call people from the Mediterranean pasty white. Eastern Europeans has more in common with people from west Asia. Diversity is needed, I don't argue that. But Europe is not unison. After all, the Hispanic also have European descent. From southern Europe.
@@elreytriton
Funny you mention Finland nearby with Anglo-Saxons. Finland has the most unique genetic composition in Europe, very different from other Europeans. Some Indians have more similar haplogroups to Anglo-Saxons than Finns do
There are many excellent comments here, and some are pointing out that, of course, if research is being done in Western nations, that it is not surprising that most of the participants and research tend to focus on Caucasians "by default", as if no real discrimination or exclusion of people of color is occurring. As a physician who has cared for thousands of patients at 3 Michigan hospitals, I can assure you that blatant racism, (and to a lesser extent, sexism), by both doctors and staff, is very much alive and well - and most medical research is based in hospitals. (E.g., black patients are frequently treated like they are drug-seeking addicts when they justifiably require pain medicine, or not being offered the same advanced or expensive care that is automatically offered to a white patient - even when they have identical health insurance.) I think some efforts are being made to address this, but there is still a lot of work to do. Great video, SciShow!!
I always suspected that most physicians, especially physicians in Michigan were racists. Finally now, based on your iron clad anecdotal evidence, I can rest assured that my intuition was more than a hunch.
@@morgen_21 classic
@@morgen_21 Dont blame a doctor for your cultures problems
We dont blame you for your cultures problems
@@Monojoe Classic racist pretending to find racism everywhere, trying to analyze human behaviour while overlooking their own
@@azmanabdula My comment was obviously satirical comedy. You don't know anything about me or my "culture". Also, when you say "we", who else are you talking about, or are you more than one person?
This is gonna be a fun comments section.... *grabs popcorn*
don't think you're ever better than anyone else.
@@StudioUAC It's a joke mate
wrg
so so many idiots. the world amazes me
Why do you spam these comment sections with your crap all the time?
I don't think "recruited" is the right terminology. Like, not even in the same universe remotely close! Not only were these men Not told that they were being purposely INFECTED with a serious and deadly sexually transmitted disease. But they were told that what they were being treated for was "bad blood".
In the end, none of them were even given the proper treatment for the Disease, which caused deaths, their wives (who were also infected), and some sadly even passed it on to their children. The criminality of this "experiment" is ridiculous! The cretins responsible for and administers of this so-called "experiment" should have had to be "experimented" on themselves. I think this would have been the only appropriate punishment.
and at that time..they qualified themselves as the smart ones. aka 'educated'
I came in expecting the normal REEEEEEE but was kinda surprised.
If gynomes can cause such drastically different effects from different types of medications... why isn't more research being done?
I'm not fully educated on whether skin pigmentation is honestly that important when it comes to saving lives, but how your base DNA can cause issues or conflict with different medications, then there's an obvious need for a solution. The real question being... why though? What makes the gynome inhospitable to these meds? It's very curious and who knows! Maybe we'll find something new about ourselves in the process!
"I came in expecting the normal REEEEEEE but was kinda surprised"
Look again.
Time and reduced cost will give us time to play catch up with increasing effectiveness with every leap forward. And that's said as a PathA in next-gen sequencing research and US Citizen of Dominican origin
The same way we parsed out GFR for Europeans and non-Europeans decades ago
I'm not saying it was Skillshare.
...but it was Skillshare
*Alien meme*
I was trying to figure out why so many people disliked the video, But once 5:36 came around it became clear. I agree that we need more researchers in the field, but do you care to explain further how the culture of the researchers will change the results of research?
(COMMENTS THAT RESOLVED THE ISSUE)
TRiG - Also, you clearly didn't listen to the rest of the sentence, which also answered your question. The clue's in the word "since".
michael hopper - Ok, I see. I needed to play that last part over a few times. I'm still not too sure about the different perspectives part because usually you want to set aside your bias in order to obtain good data, Culture influences your bias. I guess it's better to have multiple sets of biases rather than just one, now that I think of it we can just compare all the different results and look for consistencies in the data and pin point where the bias comes in.
michael hopper humans....if I am a researcher I tend to choose people who are similar to me when researching big groups unconsciously so that means in theory if people of different cultures and skin tones are the ones doing the research they would choose people are similar to them therefore diversifying the research
A minority researcher is less likely to forget about everyone who isn’t white, and they’ll be more familiar with cultural and class boundaries in their group, making working with those people easier.
Were you not listening to the first five minutes of the video, which explain the problem? Do you think that the syphalis experiment would have happened in a world where most researchers were black?
Also, you clearly didn't listen to the rest of the sentence, which also answered your question. The clue's in the word "since".
@@qwertyTRiG Ok, I see. I needed to play that last part over a few times. I'm still not too sure about the different perspectives part because usually you want to set aside your bias in order to obtain good data, Culture influences your bias. I guess it's better to have multiple sets of biases rather than just one, now that I think of it we can just compare all the different results and look for consistencies in the data and pin point where the bias comes in.
I'm surprised that Japan and China aren't extremely active in the DNA research.
I'm pretty sure that the Chinese doctor that went public with their gene editing is far from the first to practice it.
For Japan I am pretty sure that this is because the public founding goes more towards other fields.
As for China, I have no idea (but it is important to remember that not all researches are published so who knows maybe they do and they just don't tell others to keep an edge or to avoid outrages, it is a possibility)
@@sephikong8323 Yes, I don't know. It seems that for scientific prestige alone that they would publish. That is a lot of potential data.
@@violet-trash I was thinking more along the lines of genetic data linked to health issues. Gene editing can bring backlash for the public at large, but information on health and health risks is pretty much all upside.
@@bobbyvee260 It still using sequenced genome data either way, which it would seem they've not been idle on obtaining.
You lack an explanation for why both the statement that the difference between individual genomes usually caps at 1% only and the statement that the use of a European genome is less effective for those of non-european descent medically do not contradict each other in the context which they are used. This is something that should not be skipped over.
Let me try to explain it with an analogy. Pretend the genome is exactly 26 characters long and a capital letter matches the reference genome and a lower case one deviates. We'll also assume each individual has two letters that deviate on average.
While any given individual will have 24 capital letters, you can still construct that in such a way that subpopulations differ. For example, maybe white people never have a lower case letter in the GHIJKL range and be twice as likely to have a lower case letter in the QRST range compared to the UVWX and MNOP ranges. That means researchers will pay more attention to QRST and almost none to GHIJKL.
That can be a problem in a few ways. You may miss patterns like lower case Q requires a capital H. You could also pay too much attention to RST when STU actually contains the sequence you care about but was not considered because it wasn't in the high variance area.
@@o76923 Ok, but my point is that an explanation such as this is not given in the video. I myself am already aware of this but others may not be. I am not asking a question, I am giving a critique.
@@toddmorningstar4206, I completely disagree. It is would be a digression over a minute long on the topic of how statistical distributions work to people who don't understand them. Most viewers of the video should either 1. Already know it, 2. Accept that the expert you would trust for an explanation can in fact explain it, or 3. Won't be swayed anyway because their politics already determined whether they agree or not.
There were tons of tangents that he could have gone on to explain not critical topics within the video. But none of them would have helped explain the problem, why it's a problem, or what some solutions are.
@@o76923 You fail to address others that may use this to prove race-biased beliefs. Sure, their political opinions would likely not be changed by this video, but it leaves a loophole that can be used to validate racist claims which such people would relentlessly search for and show to others an out-of-context version. Basically my argument is that the need to clarify is to reduce the amount that the message can be warped.
Medicine and clinical trials have also had issues with women. How things as diverse as autism and heart attacks can present in different ways - but people only look out for or recognise those commonly linked to men. Things like different metabolisms. Also an issue for people of different sizes - with some medications not working as well for larger people and it not being talked about. I'm sure there's a ton of other areas. In short, research needs to include people of all backgrounds and body types to get a good handle on how things work for everyone. And teach that. Make that info available.
@@ChaosSwissroIl But they don't really outnumber girls. The statistics are wrong because only the male symptoms have been studied extensively. Girls are constantly misdiagnosed because we present differently than boys do. That's the whole point Neth was trying to make. When I was a teenager I was diagnosed with depression because of my social isolation but I've never been depressed and my isolation was self-inflicted because being around other kids was exhausting and gave me migraines. I wasn't diagnosed with ASD until adulthood when I read about it online and decided to talk about it with a psychologist.
@@ChaosSwissroIl That's hard to say simply for that fact that girls tend to be misdiagnosed or undiagnosed so having a precise statistic right now is unlikely. Tony Attwood has a great youtube video about girls with Aspergers (now classified as ASD in the DSM 5) and how they present differently than boys. If you have time, you should give it a watch.
@@ChaosSwissroIl The differences between male and female brains are lesser than the differences between people of the same sex. Most prominent differences can be explained by neurological plasticity. Meaning that upbringing and social conditioning plays a far greater role in how the brain develops than development during gestation. Which is also why early diagnosis and habilitation can do wonders for a child's continued development. It won't make the condition go away but it does help with coping and handling different situations.
Besides, women also produce testosterone. There is even a medical condition causing over-production of androgens in women.
Waa! Waa! Waa! Quit bitchin and get to work
@@ChaosSwissroIl Artificial? More artificial than to assume boys are naturally more interested in cars and girls are more interested in horses? Because that's what the studies you mention pretend is the case. And we can't compare to other species either, that's even more silly. We are not chimpanzees.
The brain change in correspondence to our environment.
But ... but ... I thought race was a social construct ...
these two things are not inconsistent in the slightest
@@tomlangford1999 That sounds cognitively dissonant.
@@Lwydius
Exactly what I thought when I heard it..
Try argueing about difference in IQ between races and all of a sudden races don't exist anymore and you're a racist for even seeing a difference in skin color..
@@brianc5581 Yeah, it's science when it suits the agenda, bigoted hateful ignorance when it doesn't.
@@Lwydius nope - 95% of human genetic diversity is irrelevant to race - primarily because Africa is where 95% of human evolution occured and it is only relatively recently that humans migrated out of Africa.
Races are not discrete groupings and show a vast amount of overlap - the only reason we think races are so different is because they look different to our eyes and we are biased toward outside looks - but that's not a scientific way of grouping individuals.
Are there differences between races? Certainly, but a majority of it cannot be explained by genetic differences alone and is better explained by social differences.
I guess that prior 2015, it was pretty hard to find an African test subject in e.g. Germany... Of course, you can request samples to be sent from the other side of the world, but testing new medicine on a diverse cast of test subjects would be a logistical nightmare, especially if you had to involve many hospitals from over the world to cooperate, despite having different cultures of bureaucracy...
black people also live in germany my guy
5:36 Look, based on the information needing additional genetic data on the other populations on this planet is a must; however, diversity of skin color=/=diversity of perspective or thought. A rich black guy in the US and a poor Afrikan aren't going to have even remotely the same "perspective" on any relevant genetic studies on the mean. The same can be said for Asians, Native Americans, Middle Easterners or Caucasians. This second part of the argument breaks down.
the fist thing I do is think in relation to what he mentioned is this, because there is a history of colored people being abused by white scientists, having more scientists or color would promote trust and make them more likely to participate in studies.
it might also add more perspectives as to how to approach research since different backgrounds could diversify starting angles / ideas. it might benefit everyone.
@@Katiecatsy What part of diversity of skin color=/=diversity of perspective or thought was difficult to grasp? Sure, a black kid is going to have a greater chance of growing up in a primarily poor, black neighborhood, but that doesn't mean that a poor Asian or Caucasian can't grow up there and have the same/similar perspective. Again, the second part of the argument breaks down. I'm not arguing against the first part, how is that hard to grasp?
Tayloring references to specific subgroups is sure to cut some corners, but ultimately I feel "precision" medicine will really take off only with cheap and fast enough genome-sequencing tech for widespread _individual_ diagnosis; that way, you solve two problems at the price of a big one
Plus, I realized there might be bad consequences for, e.g., drug regulation with too much "diverse" research; know those paper slips that come within a med's box? Some are practically a book already; can you imagine how they'll manage to fit them in tiny boxes if we expand them to include ever more ethnic-specific data? Those things should go to a digital database (if not already), and _doctors_ should have to go through 'em, not the patients, anyways
Again, having the extra data won't hurt (AI problem), as long as the subgroup data don't overfit the individual data and lead to _worse_ diagnoses - Statistics is a fickle mistress, folks...
Whitecentric ? Oh you mean like SciShow hosts.
Half of their cast (at least of the 4 I can think of off the top of my head) are POC. What are you talking about?
The differences between the genomes of different ethnicities are obvious examples but there are differences even between the members of a family - children and their parents. This is because even if the genes of two people are identical, the expression of the gene can be dramatically different due to accumulated mutations in the genome or epigenetic differences. So, instead of the genome, it is better to focus on the presence of the RNAs and proteins in the individuals. That's why the techniques such as RNA-seq gives way too much detailed and precise information compared to sequencing the genome. As far as I am aware, nucleotide sequence informations are out of date in precision medicine literature.
Maybe what needs to be done is that every country needs to sequence the genome of every child born in that country. and have it on file for the lifetime of that person. Once that person has died it can then go into the general population genomes sequenced for the world. This needs to be a voluntary sequencing OKed by the parent(s) of said child and reaffirmed by that child when they reach the age of majority in their country. These genome sequencing needs to be shared between countries if the parents(s) and child move to a new country. And shared with the new country. If each country can do a census of its population each year it can cretainly do a genomic census as well on all of its inhabitants.
Me and my medical genetics degree are rolling our eyes 🙄
And the video is USA centric.
athreyum kooduthal centric alla
kurzegast is much more eurocentric
while pbs is a complete americophile
To be fair, given that the US has a larger population of PoC than basically any country in the EU, and more resources to work with than much of the Southern Hemisphere, it’s in a good position to fix this situation. One of the best, in fact (outside of Japan’s good resources for research, but even if that fills out another group, iirc, they’re among the most homogeneous groups on earth, thanks to a long period of isolationism)
@@spindash64 I agree that the USA is the most diverse country. But the sample could leave out many people groups like, south American natives, non-west Africans etc. If at all nurture has any bearing on the DNA, things could get more complicated.
@@sasidharankarthikeyan3798 Well, PBS is also a US government funded program... So, you know, they might be paid to be more US focused
@@declaringpond2276 To be frank, I didn't know that PBS is funded by the US govt. Now, I can understand why it is so US-centric. Thanks.
Does being mixed race add another issue to diagnosis and finding a working cure? Are mixed race people more likely to react like one race over another or a mix of both when doing tests on them?
This topic doesn't get enough clout (just like most science) so every thing you can to support research in diversity and spread awareness of this problem
We need diversity in the database. For scientific reasons, not ethical ones. I think everyone agrees about the scientific part. Adding the ethics aspect, and the end about diversity among researchers are what will drive this comment section.
Completely agree.
Unfortunately that's not really true. Reasonably smart and well-intentioned people can disagree on how diversity in researchers will or won't impact research, but a lot of the vileness in the comment section is coming from people angry that "WE have to fix the everyone else's problems", because they think it's bad that scientists care about non-white people
@@imporia nope. That's your imagined divisiveness
@@imporia Thanks for caring, but poc don't need to be saved by white science.
Ethics is pretty important to keep in our science, though. Science without ethics can get pretty warped, and I think it’s relevant in any scientific pursuit or discussion to talk about ethical ramifications and factors alongside more “scientific” rationales.
Another group that showed no side effect from Warfarin:
Klingons
What's a Klingon's favorite battery?
Duras-ell
Zak Arranda 😂😂😂
Aight, I'm a bit confused. I looked up some papers on races the other day, and they stated that races in humanity do not exist. I suppose the increase in genetic diversity in research is still useful, but yeah, that's left me somewhat confused.
what papers did you read on that? taxonomy gets really unclear and vague as you go further down
@@imporia I didn't have full access to any of the articles, but all of the year 2000+ articles on google scholar had the same idea in the abstract, where the genetic diversity was too small in humans to be classified as a race, like we would do in other species. (Like certain monkeys).
Here's an example: www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1369848613000460
@@yuirick hm... Interesting.
Here's the thing. There's various genetic groups. Haplogroups. Those sometimes vaguely follow race lines, especially in Europe, but they often do not. The Haplogroup D-M174 for example exists in former Ainu territory, the Ryukyuan islands, Tibet, and the Sentinalese islands.
Note pure Ainu look almost European even though they are from north Japan. Tibetans look similar to most e asians. Sentinalese look african, though they share about as much in common with them as Indians do.
The Haplogroup I exists in most of Europe. You could say this almost a "White" haplogroup. So race does exist? Again, it's more complex. Kurdish people share this, while Portuguese, Galicians, Occitans and Leonese don't.
Then there's Haplogroup I1 that pretty much exists only in Germanic countries. So is this a Germanic gene? Well, there's exception. Fins and North Russians have it.
Tl;DR Race doesn't really exists, but can sometimes be used to simplify groups that share similar genetic traits, however in many cases it's utterly useless.
@@luizmatthew1019 That was fairly informative, from what I can tell. Thank you. :)
steph curry is a skillshare teacher
I have been waiting for SciShow to do a video on the deep methodological problems involved with using genomics to classify human populations into ancestral and racial categories. This area of research employs a diverse range of methods and assumptions, but historians, social scientists and philosophers have been arguing that there are many reasons we should be skeptical that genomics can give us non-circular answers. Please have a look at some of the really important research on this issue. www.sciencehistory.org/profile/ramya-rajagopalan is a great start.
It is hardly surprising to find that scientific research conducted in a given society will find the majority of that society are represented in the findings of that research. If such research was conducted in Africa it would be reasonable to expect to find the native population would be the majority of those studied. I expect the same can be said of any country or society that they are most likely to study their own population before looking elsewhere to do additional research on minority communities. Additionally those who are supporting and paying for said research are most likely to be interested in how it applies to them. It would be instructive to find if research done outside the Western, Chinese, Japanese and Indian societies is more "inclusive" of minorities.
Diversity of skin color does not indicate a diversity of thought, or a diversity of genes. Yes we need more data from more diverse populations to get the most accurate information, and then apply that knowledge accurately, but that doesn't mean limited data and information is bad, just that more is better.
why did i read the comments.....
I feel your pain :(
Absolutely nothing about this is controversial. Greater diversity of data and perspectives is always good.
Thank you.
5:38
Why does the researcher race matter they said it does
Who also read it comics’ diversity problem?
apparently nobody else read those comics either
The issue is real, first time research is based on a small dna sample size, because it was expensive and research must blow all that money on a single target dna or gene to be able to get results and get published, it's what we see generally with study replication, nobody does it because it's as expensive as the first study but the results aren't published for lack of innovation. It's a risky move do you go wide and cover your bases but risk not getting results published in time, or go narrow and beat everyone to the patent. It's too bad that they chose to present this from a racial perspective and a progressive historical lens followed up by an diversity , equity, inclusivity argument.
Once the process for full genome sequencing drops researchers will use the data. Once China and Europe and Africa invest in more research diversity in studies and samples will solve the problem itsel. The tragedy here is the "monopoly" the US has on medical research, they do pubpish the majority of papers in this field. Europe is investing some money but their investments in London are at risk due to Brexit and the Lübeck Center is still WIP. China has started doing some interesting work, let's hope they continue to get funded. Africa unfortunately hasn't developed their economy at the level where they can fund many of these academic studies, but often do shared research with US groups. It's maybe important to keep journals to better standards of sample size and sample diversity and peer review and the free market will correct fir past narrow results. Rant over.
Very interesting.
Most genome studies were done in mostly european countries. It kind of goes without saying that this would lead to majority european test subjects.
yes... its almost like …. THAT'S THE LOCAL POPULATION, WHERE THIS TESTS ARE CONDUCTED.... huh
@@HaartieeTRUE Yes. I mean I am not saying we don't need more diverse samples. Just that if the tests are done in countries that are 70% or more European than 70% or more of the samples are going to be european. You don't need the whole "minorities don't trust because of past wrongs" (not saying that doesn't exasperated the problem only that it is likely not the main reason for the problem) rigmarole to explain it.
Because no studies are ever purposefully done on minority groups within a population. We simply can’t ask that to happen more, or question why it doesn’t already happen more despite people saying it would happen more almost 30 years ago.
No, we can only work on the majority population and never question why.
@@lucillefrancois150 No one is stopping anybody from doing genetic research.....
Duke00x Maybe your idea of Western is white but there is a huge percentage of colored people who live the Western societies, they have just been previously excluded.
Meanwhile in the comment section;
*Literal clown fiesta rodeo show*
Nobody wants you here you dumb reactionaries.
Grey Mind Triggered much?
@@michaeleisner4758 says the people that flood a video when they place the word diversity in its title.
Grey Mind Nope it just seems that you’re triggered with those insults. Insults won’t get you anywhere in life
@@michaeleisner4758 yes thank you, there is possible no way I couldn't have know people dont like bieng insulted. Your big brain intellegence is impressive Sir. And such insult that I made clearly shows my triggeredness by the clear and distinct word dumb. Being annoyed that race realist flood your chat or better know as trigered is also one of the greatest ways to teare a leftist a new hole and obliterate them with the stick of facts and logic because clearly calling someone "triggered" is the best come back ever. Yes I know the cacasian race to be the best to there wonderfull bone structue. Thank you.
You smooth brained reactionary.
how can 10 percent of a genome not be on the reference genome if we only differ in dna from GORILLAS by about 2 percent?
I gave my medical files, blood, and urine to the All of Us program! You should too. More data is better.
that's the story........aka bs
@@rrs1550 why would data for research be a bad thing?
Overall a good video. Only suggestion is to change the title, because ultimately it's gonna lead to unnecessary hate and an, admittedly funny, flaming comment section. Something like "Genomics Needs a Greater Diversity in Data", or anything along the lines of addressing the main issue the video itself makes a talking point. Of course if the point of the title was to get people to watch the video with an intentional clickbait, then good job. That being said, keep up the good work SciShow.
They dont need to change simply because a few smooth brained reactionaries get triggered thay sci show acknowledged reality as in there is racism and discrimination in the world.
@@greymind9815 I do agree, I just simply think that the change would allow for an overall more positive reaction, and be more likely to get people who might be triggered by the word diversity, but may agree with the content of the video, to at least get their drawers out of a wad and listen for a bit, allowing for a, hopefully, more civil discourse. That being said it would also likely make whoever is in charge of getting rid of the truly troublesome comments have an easier time. It's ultimately their decision and they'll do what they want.
@@withCharles why would you want it to be civil. They sure as hell arent.
The video is titled for clickbait. A massive proportion of SciShow's videos are, and it doesn't matter what the votes look like as much as the views, and thus the ad revenue.
5:35: classic fallacy, race =/= culture, and culture is what defines perspective. Race is a component of physical aspects, like DNA, but it is a poor proxy for maintaining a diversity of perspective.
@Leonard Erasmus Race doesn't cause culture, does it? The recognition of races impacts culture as any other grouping.
Because it’s so very likely that a white person would be part of the Yoruba culture, and that an asian person would be part of the Navaho culture.
It’s not 1:1, but it’s statistically incredibly likely to lead to at least somewhat important differences in culture.
Culture causes race.
Race is divergence in populations.
Culture causes divergence in populations.
This all has been a commonly known problem for years. But at the same time gene technology is becoming cheaper, better and faster, every year. That means that, year by year, solving the diversity problem is becoming easier. And at some point it *will* become a non issue.
If we had medicare-for-all and made genetic testing free no-one would be justified in complaining (if they want to make a dent in the data then they can go get the test done).
All our breakthrough science discoveries from Africa we keep to ourselves.
And if im not mistaken you are white guy from South African Republic with obvious ancestors in Netherlands region :))))
@@spacejaga Yes, but there are millions of groundbreaking scientific, engineering and industrial discoveries from Africa that we have successfully hidden from the rest of the world for the past 2,000 years.
Some of the best medical capabilities in the world also happen to be where there are large populations of white people, its certainly about more than racial distrust that everyone seems to want to latch on to. I reaaaallly dont understand why this video has been downvoted so much.
Yes, which is why they should deliberately reach out to communities that aren't white
@@limiv5272 i dont disagree. i disagree with the reaction people are having to the subject
@@ppartsx honey it's racism plain and simple. Some white ppl get hot under the color when they hear the word diversity because a)they hate anyone not white and the idea of nonwhites in their spaces angers them b)they think diversity means less or no white people and that scares them c)theyre furious that white people could be passed up for opportunities that are given to a non white just "because they are not white"(because it's not like a non white could actually ever be just as or more qualified as a white person in anything).
Geez. Everyone ought to be included. For accurate data as well as social reasons
wrg
How about you stop pushing narratives into science.
@@LucidFL Genetics studies need more diverse samples. Researching only Anglos isn't going to get you much info. He's right
@@luizmatthew1019 Diverse samples are one thing, and diverse researchers are another. The issue lies with the latter and not the former.
What if your mixed like me
Then they would probably have to diagnose both sets of disease-identifying genes for both races
Curse your parents.
Enjoy your immunodeficiencies, competing alleles for expression, lack of transplants, neuroendocrinological maladaptations, histocompatibility issues.
@Herbal Shaman That would have to be the pakistanis, followed by several other middle-eastern populations. Nice try, mongrel.
@Herbal Shaman tl;dr, mongrel.
Polydopamine Competing alleles are actually healthier than you know.
How about making medical profiles of all people, anonymised of course, and make the database public. If anyone doesn't want his data made public he can opt out. PROBLEM SOLVED
Moderate your commets @scishow people here claim love of science but are still full of conscious ignorance sad sad
@no no and by different do you mean race Supremacy or just straight up hate speech you're allowed to have your own opinion but not your own facts you guys always like hide behind free speech but that doesn't mean being an a hole
You mean "apply censorship, scishow, some people are exercising wrong-think and it's making me upset because my whole grasp at this faux-reality is already flimsy and the neomarxist doctrine is too rigid for me to even entertain dissenting opinions."
Gotcha.
For real though people die because of reasonable lack of trust in medical professionals. The fact that the lack of trust is justified given documented differences in care and mortality rates I think something like this video is good way to show that the problem is more wide spread then just thinking your doctor doesn't care about you. The system excludes diversity. That has to be fixed.
This isn't racist, lmao. It's just saying we need to expand our sample size to take account of other races, making our research more accurate.
Get out of here with your common sense.
Wow not just black or white ....how about the many more ethic groups all over the world ....there are hundreds
what if most people in countries primarily studying human genome are white of european decent? Isn't the same true for China and Japan, which also do alot of genetic studies.
That's why it is called "Western Medicine"
@Cool Breeze en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_world
Cool, only thing we have to do now is the get the POC motivated enough to get into that field of research so they can help people.
Latin America is western and I'm suspecting there arent much studies on Colombians, slavs are western aswell
Besides its no longer called western medicine but modern medicine in contrast to traditional medicine, homeopathy is european traditional medicine, Chinese traditional medicine etc
So there is nothing western to this, and even if it were, large parts of the west are missing
Although I agree with the general message of this video, that being, research needs to be done equally on all races, I find the fact that it focused on black people being underrepresented disgusting. Equality isn't pro black, it's pro everyone. You never even mentioned any race other than white, black, and one tiny reference to puerto ricans. How about asians, indians, middle easterns peoples, native Americans, so on and so forth. Pro black isn't pro equally, even if they're underrepresented, the journey is just as important as the destination.
Guess, as a hybrid, I should volunteer.
Imma gonna leave this comment section before it gets ugly.
notification squaddd
what ?
Why so many dislikes on this video?
Cuz white people got offended.
This reminds me of his MSG video. Very heavy on the racial undertones.
It's not an undertone. This is about a real disparity based on race that is causing problems. This is what institutional racism looks like.
@@o76923
Does your immediate family include "people of color?" How many dates have you been on with "people of color" compared to those of European descent? Are your answers to those questions what individual racism looks like?
Well this episode got firebombed.
Or im just talking about how the response to this video is going to get massive downvotes, without any commentary on the who or why.
Why this video have a lot of hate? Can someone tell me why?
Because they blame white people for not doing research specifically to black people's health?
Instead of being happy with all the research white people did do which made their life better.. lol
@@brianc5581 Wait, this video is a lie or something? Or people just being salty. I'm not sure if I get all the information becuz english isn't my main language.
@@changgitp People are being salty, something about mentioning how the world isn't perfect for other races sets them off.
@@brianc5581 So a few things about your comment, you're suggesting that white people shouldn't be blamed, but also that they should be thanked, while not addressing concerns brought up in the video such as the Tuskegee experiments.
@@MrCordingly
What im saying is black people benefitted a lot from white people doing research and developing medicine, I don't literally expect them to thank white people for it.
And well can't deny bad things happened, but if you don't trust white scientists become a scientist yourself..
Don't blame the white scientists for not developing medicine that are specific to your race :/ especially if you don't wanna be part of research groups because you don't trust whitey.
Gawd. 552 racists and counting.
i miss having DNA
Same
VIRUS
*Damn* .......those hands in the thumbnail look ashy.
Das wacist
Raysist
I love how you admit that white people paid for and performed most of the studies, but give them grief for not paying for and performing those studies on everybody in the world equally, but say nothing against all those other races that chose not to.
Itll be fascinating when sickle cell could be wiped from human genetic history.
But how can this be? People are all exactly the same aren't they?
> Research done in Europe
> Results prioritise Europeans
Scishow: DAS RAYCIST
Always about genetics until you want to know someones sex. Then it dont matter and genders as construct. ( even when saying sex.)
That has nothing to do with this. Are you bored
Are you?
Dont forget Shetland and terra de feugue
Hobbits don't need genetic testing
I'm a POC (Indian) studying bioinformatics. I find this video more insulting me than helping or encouraging. It seems like you want to put yourself in the position of my savior but really you're only hurting the way I'm perceived among my peers. Instead of a scientist, I'm a "POC scientist".
Well, first off, stop playing their game. You aren't a Person Of Color, you're Indian. Your aren't just "not white" (which is what POC is.) you're a member of a nation that has survived for thousands of years and are the origin point for the numerals we use world wide.
What they want by using that terminology is to strip you of your heritage and hand you a jersey for team POC. So that it can be the extent of your identity.
True
@@firebornliger Well said!
that is precisely the problem with pushing "diversity".
instead of simply not treating people differently anymore, they have started treating people differently in the opposite way, which breeds resentment and when there is no way to tell wether or not someone has earned their position or was hired to meet some kind of quota, it breeds distrust even if this is not the case, the possibility of it being the case is enough.
what needs to happen is to make academic pursuits affordable and available to less affluent individuals. doing so would still get more POC into science (i mean it is no secret that racial minorities tend to be less wealthy) but without the whole race quota controversy attached to it.
the current approach to the issue screams a lack of subtlety.
it's like how trump is handling the trade war with china right now.
what he should have done is to introduce a "transport tax" which taxes goods based on how far these goods have been transported in order to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. this way he would have gotten way more public support AND he'd still be encouraging businesses to produce wares intended for the US market in the US.
Exactly. Skin colour shouldn't matter here.
"We need more data"
Absolutely. Yes.
"We need more researchers of color."
The skin color of the researchers shouldn't matter.
Cariss Stewart maybe we need this magical thing called perspective? And even if it doesn’t matter... who cares?
@@TheJuanTrueKaiser i care when science begins to bend the knee to politics. Science ought to be objective.
you're right it shouldn't matter, however people aren't perfect and it seems that most of the researchers who have been working on it so far have overlooked some pretty important details because of their color
The JuanTrueKaiser so different races would have different perspectives? Is that what you are saying?
@@TheJuanTrueKaiser in science you dont need to have to achieve a different perspective. this isnt social sciences we are talking about. if the person is the best fit for the position skin color doesnt matter. but if the position is forced in for racial diversity then we have a problem.
If I said the three major race groups are genetically different, and that the most intelligent are generally the East Asians (probably because of their crossbreeding with Neanderthal and Denisova species), and the least intelligent are African Blacks, or that the best athletic are the African Blacks and the least athletic are the East Asians, I'd be called "racist". However, it's perfectly fine to use these race labels (which are obviously genetically established - as this show reveals to the ignorant) when discussing medical treatments. When will all this crap cease and people be treated as the individuals they are instead of as members of a group?
Why does SciShow have no black presenters?