
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
Commentary |
Ralph Lauren Center for Cancer Care and Prevention, New York, New York 10035
| Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| Our Nations History Concerning Race and the Role of Science |
|---|
|
|
|---|
To review this history briefly as it pertains to African-Americans: The first African slaves were brought to America in 1619. In 1776, the Declaration of Independence was written. It was penned in part by Thomas Jefferson, a complex man who could write such an eloquent document yet owned >100 slaves and, according to DNA evidence, fathered children by an African slave. We fought a civil war in large part to eliminate slavery, which led to the Emancipation Proclamation and reconstruction. The Fourteenth Amendment, passed in 1868, mandated equality under the law for all Americans, including the former slaves. In the 1896 Plessy versus Ferguson Supreme Court decision, the Fourteenth Amendment was in effect reversed. That decision ruled that separation of the races was legal if the accommodations were equal and thereby reestablished legal segregation. Not until 1954 in the Supreme Court decision in Brown versus Board of Education, followed by the civil rights movement, was racial segregation rendered illegal. An understanding of this history is critical to understanding racial disparities.
Going back even further, evolutionary history indicates that man originated in East Africa
100,000 years ago and later migrated to the rest of the world. By this measure, all of us in this country are African-Americans, a tough concept to accept for some but substantiated in science. Perhaps broad acceptance of this idea could lead us, finally, to embrace the reality that we are all human beings with common origins. Charles Darwin (1)
maintained that "the variability of all of the characteristic differences between races cannot be of much importance."
But for centuries, science also has provided evidence that supported other popular conceptions of race. In the 1700s, Blumenbach (2) was credited with classifying people into African-American, Caucasian, and other racial categories. He coined the term, "Caucasian," because he found a beautiful skull in the Caucasus Mountains of Russia, and he named the people that he favored the Caucasians, based on that skull. Morton (3) measured skulls of Native-Americans, African-Americans, and Caucasians and concluded that Caucasian skulls had more volume, so they must have bigger brains and, therefore, more intelligence. This conclusion was accepted by scientists for many decades, starting in the mid-1800s. It may be coincidental, but such scientific misconceptions dominated popular thinking throughout the period of slavery in this country and may have been used to justify the institution of slavery in America. Pillars of the community (judges, United States Senators, national leaders, the clergy, etc.) needed justifications for how they could enslave other people.
American classifications of race came out of this history in which people were categorized by external visible traits (skin color, hair type, facial features, etc.) and treated differently. So science has been a major force in establishing and reinforcing racial classifications. The residue of these fallacies continues to color the lenses through which we see, value, and behave toward one another.
Past and current United States Census categories reflect this history, e.g., the 1890 census included the racial categories African-American, Caucasian, mulatto (meaning half Caucasian and half African-American), quadroon (one-quarter African-American and three-quarters Caucasian), and octoroon (one-eighth African-American and seven-eighths Caucasian). Today, this nation continues to look at its people in categories. Yet population geneticists and genome scientists say that all of a persons external characteristics together constitute only a miniscule expression of 40,000 genes that comprise the human genome. In fact, geneticists now state that there seems to be more genetic variation (95%) within a group that is called a particular race than between so-called racial groups (5%; Ref. 4 ).
| The One Drop Rule |
|---|
|
|
|---|
There is no other group in America, or in the rest of the world, that is subject to such a rule. You can be Native-American and become Caucasian. You can be Asian and become Caucasian by marriage and be accepted. But if you are African-American in America, you can never un-African-American yourself. In recent years, a growing number of people seem to be embracing the notion that most individuals have ancestry that traces back to more than one population group. Golf champion Tiger Woods, e.g., has described himself as a "Cablinasian" (CAucasian, BLack, American-INdian, and ASIAN). His estimate of being one-eighth African-American would make him an octoroon by the standard of 1890. So, people, young people in particular, are beginning to challenge traditional racial classifications.
Biological race theories such as the one drop rule that purport to establish distinctive races conflict with evolutionary theory and the principles of natural selection. The conclusion that the biological concept of race is untenable and has no legitimate place in biological science was published for the first time in 1996 by the American Association of Physical Anthropologists (6) . This statement confirmed that there is no genetic basis for racial classification and that previous and current racial classifications are socially and politically determined.
| Poverty and Culture |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
|
I theorize that poverty is reflected through the prism of culture. If this hypothesis is correct, then culture may augment or diminish povertys expected effects. Consider the Seventh Day Adventists, a culture driven strongly by religious beliefs; those who follow the religion consume a vegetarian diet and neither smoke cigarettes nor drink alcohol. Even if a person is poor but is living in that culture, it is unlikely that this individual will develop lung cancer, because 90% of lung cancer is related to cigarette smoking. Similarly, known health effects of excess alcohol use would likely be avoided. A diet high in vegetables and fruits seems to prevent disease. In contrast, the culture of the people I have worked with in Harlem is different. These are mainly poor African-Americans, many of whom smoke heavily, drink heavily, and eat a high fat, high salt diet often referred to as "soul food." That diet may be very tasty, but it is not good for you. Drinking excessively, smoking, and eating more fat and salt are cultural conditions that will cause an accentuation of the problems of poverty. In Harlan, Kentucky, the people are Caucasian and poor, and their health risks and outcomes related to smoking, drinking, and diet are very similar to those of African-American people in Harlem. I conclude that the excess mortality in Harlem, New York; Harlan, Kentucky; and other similar communities throughout America is driven primarily by the effects of poverty and culture, not by race in itself.
| Social Injustice/The Lens of Race |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The cultural framework in which science is conducted and the role science has played in constructing and legitimizing race and racism must be recognized and addressed. People are socialized and acculturated before they become educated. This implies that culture and cultural values, including those concerning race, may be a kind of baggage that virtually all people, including scientists, bring to their professional endeavors and social interactions.
I believe that in this nation, and perhaps throughout the world, we see, value, and behave toward one another through a powerful lens of race (10) . This lens can create false assumptions that may result in serious harm to members of some racial and ethnic groups. This phenomenon has been called racial profiling; we have seen it in cab drivers who bypass certain types of passengers, policemen who search some people without apparent cause, the judicial system, housing, as well as the field of medicine.
What assumptions do doctors make when they see people who are different from themselves? The literature includes some examples that indicate problems, e.g., Bach (11) showed that compared with Caucasian patients, African-Americans with the same stage of early and highly curable lung cancer (stages I and II) are 12% less likely to receive the curative surgery, although they have the same insurance coverage and seem to be at the same economic level. Ayanian (12) found that race is a major factor in who is referred for renal transplantation; you are more likely to be referred for transplantation if you are Caucasian than if you are African-American. Studies of emergency room experiences indicated that people also are treated for pain differently according to race; compared with Caucasians, African-Americans and Hispanics are less likely to be treated with pain-reducing drugs when they have long bone fractures, clearly a painful condition (13 , 14) . This and other evidence suggest that race does play a role in the provision of medical care. I believe the common thread in these findings is a subtle form of racial bias on the part of medical care providers. The level and extent of this problem are unknown, but it is real and potentially harmful, although predominantly unintentional.
Looking through the lens from the other direction, how do patients see health care professionals? If a patient does not trust his or her doctor, or avoids participating in a clinical trial for fear of being used as a guinea pig, the patient too is looking through a lens of race with possibly detrimental results. False assumptions made based on the view from either side of this lens of race, therefore, can have profound effects on unequal treatment and health disparities.
| The Context of Health Disparities |
|---|
|
|
|---|
8 years, that the disease would be conquered. Cancer turned out to be a far more complex disease than he thought. Yet, this declaration was important because it channeled significant resources to the research community. This allocation of resources has resulted in improved cancer detection, treatment, and cancer-related technologies. Exploration of the human genome and molecular understanding of cancer are now yielding unprecedented discoveries and will lead to untold advances in the future. Despite our tremendous scientific advances, however, there are some populations in this country who bear a heavier burden of disease, particularly the poor and underserved. The question is, "Why?" Disease always occurs within a context of human circumstances. Social position, economic status, culture, and environment are critical determinants of who is born healthy, grows up healthy, sustains health throughout his or her life span, survives disease, and maintains a good quality of life after diagnosis and treatment. The unequal burden of disease in our society, including but not limited to cancer, is a challenge to science and, more importantly, a moral and ethical dilemma for our nation.
The equal importance of research and health care delivery must be acknowledged, as must the disconnect in our country between what we discover and deliver to people in all walks of life (Fig. 3
; Ref. 15
). The challenge to the scientific community to eliminate disparities in health, particularly cancer-related health disparities, encompasses issues that span the continuum that begins with basic research, continues through translational research in our medical and cancer centers, and through applied and cancer control research to public education and the delivery of care to the American people, including health care coverage considerations and the policy implications that accompany these concerns. We must deliver our advances in cancer care to all of the people, regardless of their ability to pay, but doing so will require a series of actions by local, state, and national policymakers and legislators.
|
| The Use of Race in Science and Society |
|---|
|
|
|---|
At this time, it appears that the single most important and perhaps only valid reason for continuing to use racial classification is to measure and monitor the effects of past and present social injustice. If people are grouped in a certain category and treated differently, then being in the category itself is the problem. If we are to understand why there are disparities, however, we cannot continue to use the census categories as the only way to see groups of people. We need to look much deeper to find the real variables that are causing disparity, whatever they may be. To the extent the issue may be lack of resources or poverty, cultural differences, lack of health insurance, or some complex array of factors that must somehow be identified and quantified, let us determine that. We must move away from saying that being in a group itself is the cause of disparity, unless it is because of how people are treated according to fairness issues.
Since the human genome has been mapped, debates within the scientific community about race have intensified. When you look at the human genome, you cannot find race, but there are populations of people around the world who have different patterns of disease. A frequent response to such a statement is, "What about sickle cell disease in African-Americans? What about Tay-Sachs disease in Jewish people?" With regard to sickle cell disease, the explanation seems to be that it began in sub-Saharan Africa, as well as in southern Europe, India, and other areas in which malaria is endemic. The people whose RBCs sickled were somewhat protected against malaria. So here you have a case of adaptation followed by migrations of people to all parts of the world, including many to this country. Similar population grouping, survival, and migration phenomena may explain Tay-Sachs and BRCA-1/BRCA-2 mutations among Jewish people. Geographic origin, patterns of intermating, and migration are strong determinants of population characteristics; these populations are not equivalent to race. We must take the time to uncover the real variables that are causing disparities. In doing so, there may be groups of people with a genetic commonality who may be important to study, and we should not hesitate to do so, but groups that we will find by this technique will not be equivalent to socially determined race groups.
| Final Considerations |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Given the history of our country, we can easily make assumptions about people that cause harm without intending harm. Overt racism still exists, but that is not now the major American problem. The real problem is something I call "racialism," a gentler term, referring to the ways in which we see, value, and behave toward each other according to race. This is a pervasive American problem that we must face. I believe that education is the key to change. Let us begin with Kindergarten to raise a new group of American people who no longer see each other through a lens of race. In medical care, we must create cultural sensitivity through education and dialogue. We also must establish and implement standards of care for specific conditions and monitor equity in the use of those treatments.
Racism, rooted in the erroneous concept of biological racial superiority, has been a powerful force in this nation for 500 years and is a part of the cultural framework of societal, institutional, and civilizational values that continues to shape scientific thought. We seek scientific truth, but that drive must always be wedded to concern for social justice. Even in the laboratory, it is not enough to simply find an answer and go on to the next question without considering how our discoveries can affect real people in the neighborhoods throughout this country and the world community. We must show as much concern for human beings as we do for molecules. We need to direct our efforts to alleviating the overlapping causes of disparity, including poverty, culture, and social injustice.
In author James Baldwins day, race and racism were highly charged issues. In answer to a question put to him by a Caucasian journalist, Baldwin said, "As long as you believe that you are Caucasian, I will have to say that I am black," essentially placing the burden of the issue on the people who classify themselves as the dominant group.
Although surrounded by a group of Haitian citizens, Papa Doc Duvalier of Haiti was asked by a journalist, "What percentage of the people in Haiti are white?" Papa Doc thought for a moment, and he said, "98% of the people in Haiti are white." The journalist, looking around and seeing the dark faces, looked at Duvalier with some amazement and asked how this could be. Replied Duvalier, "We use the one drop rule, too."
It is important to see things in perspective. Perhaps the greatest of all scientists was Albert Einstein. In his theory of relativity, he described a four-dimensional universe in which observers viewing an event will see that event differently. This commentary is from the perspective of the great-great grandson of a slave who has spent a career as a cancer surgeon in a poor community. This has been in part a 30-year endeavor to understand the interplay of socioeconomic conditions, culture, and social injustice on the unequal burden of disease. From this perspective, I also, through oversight positions at the national level, have had the opportunity to observe the whole nation and much of the world. I believe that what Einstein concluded has important meaning in our considerations of race in science and society: what you see depends on where you stand.
| Footnotes |
|---|
accepted 1/ 6/03.
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
E. Ward, A. Jemal, V. Cokkinides, G. K. Singh, C. Cardinez, A. Ghafoor, and M. Thun Cancer Disparities by Race/Ethnicity and Socioeconomic Status CA Cancer J Clin, March 1, 2004; 54(2): 78 - 93. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| Cancer Research | Clinical Cancer Research |
| Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention | Molecular Cancer Therapeutics |
| Molecular Cancer Research | Cancer Prevention Research |
| Cancer Prevention Journals Portal | Cancer Reviews Online |
| Annual Meeting Education Book | Meeting Abstracts Online |