Is genetics research biased?

Geneticists study genes, heredity, and genetic variation. One of the main reasons they do this is to better understand disease and ageing. But imagine if genetics research focused primarily on one subset of people? Could the subsequent medical innovations and products be biased towards that subset? That’s what a scientist from the University College London has suggested.

Genetic studies limited in scope

A recent international assessment, as cited in an article by The Guardian, found that 78% of the samples used in over 3,000 genetic research projects had come from individuals of European ancestry. On the other hand, samples from individuals of east Asian descent, for instance, accounted for just 9%. This is interesting given that China has the largest population of any country.

And again, out of 500,000 volunteer sample givers (to British research support company Biobank) black participants made up only 1.6% of donors. Conversely, white British participants made up 94.6%, compared to 91.3% of the general population.

What does this mean?

Professor David Curtis, a geneticist and psychiatrist at University College London suggests that because genetic studies are carried out primarily on samples from white European populations, the results are essentially meaningless when applied to other ethnic groups.

This has implications for the prevention and treatment of diseases such as schizophrenia or high blood pressure – any genetic disease really – in some subsets of the population. In summary, future treatment options for genetic diseases may be effective or ineffective depending on your racial background.

The other side of the story

Curtis put his findings into a letter to the leaders of the Medical Research Council (MRC) and the Wellcome Trust in December, along with some pretty strong views on the matter.

John Savill, then chief executive of the MRC, responded quickly to Curtis’s letter. He suggested adequate steps were already being taken to ensure the integrity and effectiveness of genetic research. According to The Guardian, he wrote, “I do not think it is helpful to cast concerns over experimental design as ‘equalities issues’.”

It’s also important to remember that the current situation does not necessarily indicate intent on the part of researchers. It could be that the sampling processes in the first place are not adequate. For example, Biobank, mentioned above, may not have measures in place to ensure diversity of participants. Or if sampling is on a volunteer basis, perhaps individuals from minority groups are less inclined to come forward and give samples. That introduces another level of complexity, doesn’t it?

What do you think?

The above discussion certainly is food for thought. And we’ll leave it to you to read about the research – and suggest possible solutions.

Nevertheless, one thing is for certain. Genetics is a most intriguing field of study. Would you like to be geneticist? Check out some of the links below.

Read more about this:

The Guardian: Genetics research ‘biased towards studying white Europeans  

Pew Research Center: Which 7 countries hold half the world’s population?

NIH National Human Genome Research Institute: Frequently asked questions about genetic research 

Environmental Science: What is a geneticist?