Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.


Changing the wrapping won’t fix genetic-racism package

Nature misses a chance to grant agency to marginalized communities in inviting Alice Popejoy to point out that altering racial classifications will not absolve power imbalances in genetics (Nature 596, 463; 2021).

In 1785, philosopher Christoph Meiners reduced continental-scale diversity to an imperial classification system to subjugate colonized peoples. This system is still used by geneticists, and lingers beyond terms such as Caucasian. New ethnonyms replaced older terms (‘mongoloid’ became ‘Asian’, for instance) but failed to redress underlying racism. And socially constructed categories are used in biologically essentialist ‘race correction’ to model disease risks (see, for example, D. E. Roberts Lancet 397, 17–18; 2021).

To demolish genetic racism, geneticists must defer to communities to self-define their ‘belongingness’ (see, for example, K. S. Tsosie Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 62, 91–96; 2020). Any unequal system of classification that reifies race, ethnicity and ancestry for biological insight reproduces the obstacles it attempts to dismantle and does not solve the causes of health disparities.

We advocate empowering communities to label themselves; to undertake ethnographies to contextualize research findings; and to self-determine research they deem beneficial.

Nature 597, 475 (2021)


Competing Interests

The authors declare no competing interests.


Nature Careers


Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing


Quick links