MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4394607295 · doi:10.1353/nai.2024.a924414

Inventing the Thrifty Gene: The Science of Settler Colonialism by Travis Hay (review)

2024· article· en· W4394607295 sur OpenAlex
Krystal S. Tsosie

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

aboutLe titre ou le résumé porte un signal canadien du lexique géographique.
no affAucune affiliation canadienne : ce travail est invisible pour une base fondée sur la seule affiliation.
Aucune affiliation canadienne. Une base fondée sur la seule affiliation (le devis habituel) n'aurait jamais vu ce travail. C'est l'un des travaux qui justifient l'inversion de la base.

Notice bibliographique

RevueNative American and Indigenous Studies · 2024
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineHealth Professions
ThématiqueIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésHayColonialismBiologyHistoryAnthropologyGenealogySociologyArchaeologyBotany

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Inventing the Thrifty Gene: The Science of Settler Colonialism by Travis Hay Krystal S. Tsosie (bio) Inventing the Thrifty Gene: The Science of Settler Colonialism by Travis Hay University of Manitoba Press, 2021 IN INVENTING THE THRIFTY GENE: The Science of Settler Colonialism, non-Indigenous historian Travis Hay writes a compelling critique of James Neel's flawed "thrifty gene hypothesis," a concept that still pervades many settler-geneticists' understanding of Type 2 diabetes mellitus in Indigenous people. This hypothesis is an extension of similar "mismatch" narratives; it posits through an evolutionary biology lens that a disease state emerges due to a divergence between Indigenous Peoples' supposedly innate and genetic predisposition to storing higher blood glucose levels attuned over centuries of traditional diet patterns and periodic famine that have become maladaptive to recent or "modern" carbohydrate-and starch-rich industrialized diets. This narrative is repeatedly substantiated in Western settler-scientists' explorations of diabetes, although it has been discredited by many who have rightfully pointed to colonial and structural factors—such as forced removal of culturally based foodways, destabilized food sovereignties, and inequities in preventative healthcare—as more evidence-based contributors to the diabetic state in Indigenous peoples compared to reductionist, simplistic narratives rooted solely in DNA.1 Hay cites these works, but he also weaves a readable and accessible history of how these concepts and dichotomies (Indigenous versus Western, "premodern"/ancestral versus modern/industrial) can be misused and serve as settler hubris reified as "science" through a singular, narrow lens of genetics. Much of Hay's book is an extended exploration of how Western academia has foundationally situated race as a biological construct in the fields of human genetics and genomics, anthropology, and even medicine. While contemporary human genetics and genomics research tries to eschew its eugenicist past—which led to dangerous, hierarchical constructions of genetic racism—academic scholars still must check each other to ensure that studies based on exploring genetic variation and differences between populations do not biologically reify "race." For instance, a 2018 open letter signed by sixty-seven scientists and researchers criticized geneticist David Reich's book Who We Are and How We Got Here for substantiating differences between groups as being of genetic not social constructions.2 As [End Page 142] long as researchers continue to push for increased inclusion of Indigenous Peoples in genetic studies, the need will remain for a book such as Hay's, which questions the situation of Indigenous bodies as sources for settler-science's extraction and benefit. As Hay writes, just as Indigenous lands and resources were usurped by colonialism, "Indian blood, like diamonds, and oil, thus became supremely valuable to settlers" (90). As a part of an intensive diagnostic analysis of Neel's genetic interest in Indigenous Peoples, Hay deconstructs Neel's "obsess[ion] with Indian blood" as a preoccupation "with his own biological self," which is an interesting critique of the man often regarded as the father of modern human genetics (87). The emergence of Hay's book comes fortuitously timed with recent and ongoing conversations to include Neel's legacy that has impacts for policy and the reckoning of genetic science.3 However, in considering the centricity of damage that one settler-scientist can do, we must also take care not to grant too much power in storifying the influence of one man as a proxy of the fields' sins at large. After all, in terms of the study of Indigenous genetics, settler-science already has a lot to atone for as it moves forward. Krystal S. Tsosie KRYSTAL S. TSOSIE (Diné/Navajo Nation) is assistant professor in the School of Life Sciences in the Center for Biology and Society at Arizona State University. Notes 1. Southam et al., "Is the Thrifty Genotype Hypothesis Supported by Evidence Based on Confirmed Type 2 Diabetes- and Obesity-Susceptibility Variants?"Diabetologia 2009 52, no. 9: 1846–51. 2. "How Not to Talk about Race and Genetics" Buzzfeed Opinion, March 30, 2018, https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/bfopinion/race-genetics-david-reich). 3. "Response to Allegations against James V. Neel in Darkness in El Dorado, by Patrick Tierney," American Society of Human Genetics 70, no. 1 (2002): 1–10...

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,003
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesÉtudes des sciences et des technologies
Catégories consensuellesÉtudes des sciences et des technologies
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Qualitatif · Signal consensuel: Qualitatif
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,165
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,998

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0030,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0100,004
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,049
Tête enseignante GPT0,431
Écart entre enseignants0,381 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle