sundin13 said:
1) And a number of diseases are significantly more common among the Finnish than any other population. Does that mean the Finnish should be considered a different race? Fact is, the patterns in allele frequencies seen between what are commonly referred to as "races" are not significant enough to make that distinction. They are often of less intensity than variations which occur between populations within "races" and overall, distinct boundaries are not present to allow the differentiation of "races". For more of the more scientific aspect of this conversation, see this post: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8731357 2) I had assumed you would understand my point through the context of my post, but since you didn't, I rephrased it in a way which was more difficult to misunderstand. To rephrase again, characteristics like, say, blood type, lose their relevance outside of a very specific context. As such, outside of that context, you would not use blood type as a means of grouping. On the other hand, there are characteristics such as age, which have a broad context of applicability. As such, grouping based on these characteristics does not require any specific context. Race is not a characteristic which holds a broad context of relevance. There are a few select potential medical uses, however, those are often dwarfed by other characteristics such as family history, or overly broad and imprecise leading to, for example, common misdiagnoses among certain populations due to race based expectations. As such, they largely lack any reasonable relevance outside of some very niche medical applications, which are outside of the purview of these school systems. 3) Again, this is largely irrelevant to the conversation, however, the reason why it matters when certain groups of people don't vaccinate their children is because of a concept called herd immunity. Basically it means that some groups within the population, such as those with weak immune systems, cannot receive vaccinations. As such, they rely on herd immunity which refers to the immunity of the group, which reduces potential exposure to disease. Totally off topic though, so I probably won't continue down this line of discussion in this thread (but feel free to open another thread if you want to discuss it in more depth). 4) It still doesn't make any sense. Perhaps the confusion on this point will be resolved by something I said above. If not, you will have to lay out your logic in detail if you wish to continue discussing this strange comment. |
"And a number of diseases are significantly more common among the Finnish than any other population."
yes which is one aspect of what makes a race, but like i amazingly had to explain to the other guy we take several factors into consideration when making these distinctions
we don't call a platypus a bird just because it lays eggs for example
i asked you before and you refused to answer me, but i'll ask again... are you claiming that black people and asian people are the same?
"Race is not a characteristic which holds a broad context of relevance."
well if you ignore the fact that it impacts all interactions between people, yeah i guess you could say that
let me ask you a question if a black guy robbed you and you were asked to describe the person would allow this silly ideology to stop you from using his race as an identifier?
", however, the reason why it matters when certain groups of people don't vaccinate their children is because of a concept called herd immunity. "
honestly i had never looked into that, so at least i've learned something here
" It still doesn't make any sense."
well i'll drop it, the more relevant parts of the conversation were addressed above anyway
