‘It’s an erroneous belief that racial categories are objective and natural’: Experts recommend losing racial labels in genetic studies

Credit: Bakken Museum (CC BY-SA 2.0)
Credit: Bakken Museum (CC BY-SA 2.0)

Race should no longer be used to describe populations in most genetics studies, a panel of experts says.

Using race and ethnicity to describe study participants gives the mistaken impression that humans can be divided into distinct groups. Such labels have been used to stigmatize groups of people, but do not explain biological and genetic diversity, the panel convened by the U.S. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine said in a report on March 14.

Follow the latest news and policy debates on sustainable agriculture, biomedicine, and other ‘disruptive’ innovations. Subscribe to our newsletter.

In particular, the term Caucasian should no longer be used, the committee recommends. The term, coined in the 18th century by German scientist Johann Friedrich Blumenbach to describe what he determined was the most beautiful skull in his collection, carries the false notion of white superiority, the panel says.

Worse, the moniker “has also acquired today the connotation of being an objective scientific term, and that’s what really led the committee to take objection with it,” says Ann Morning, a sociologist at New York University and a member of the committee that wrote the report. “It tends to reinforce this erroneous belief that racial categories are somehow objective and natural characterizations of human biological difference. We felt that it was a term that … should go into the dustbin of history.”

This is an excerpt. Read the full article here

Related Articles

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Does glyphosate—the world's most heavily-used herbicide—pose serious harm to humans? Is it carcinogenic? Those issues are of both legal and ...

Most Popular

Picture1
Hiroshima at 81: America’s new nuclear bomb, a buried Iranian target, and a question no one wants to ask
ChatGPT-Image-Mar-10-2026-01_39_01-PM
Viewpoint—“Miracle molecule” debunked: Why acemannan supplements don’t work
ChatGPT-Image-Aug-4-2026-10_15_14-AM
Viewpoint—A hard look at the Fauci diaries: Do they change what we know about COVID’s origins?
png livestock cow cattle a
Consumer skepticism about gene-edited milk is neither fixed nor particularly high—and falls even more if it’s priced lower
ChatGPT-Image-Jul-31-2026-07_35_35-AM
Wikipedia has assembled an informative list of fake news websites from across the ideological spectrum
Screenshot-2026-07-31-at-10.52.03-AM
Love sweets and fatty foods? You can blame your genes, but there are ways to quell the obsessions
Screenshot-2026-08-03-at-2.25.49-PM
As measles vaccination rates collapse, scientists push for treatments long considered unnecessary
ChatGPT Image Jul 29, 2026, 09_08_15 AM 2
The retreat of environmental extremism: Why activist NGOs are losing favor
Screenshot-2026-08-03-at-2.15.16-PM
Viewpoint: Trump’s relaxed controls on supplying China with microchips could undermine U.S. AI dominance
ChatGPT Image Jul 29, 2026, 10_17_59 AM
Viewpoint: What does it mean when critics of conventional agriculture say many fruits and vegetables are “linked” to pesticide poisoning?
Screenshot-2026-07-17-at-1.34.59-PM
Poll: Vaccine hesitancy soars when patients distrust health providers and turn to social media
ChatGPT-Image-Aug-4-2026-12_42_58-PM
Viewpoint: Fact-checking CNN interview with RFK, Jr. underscores the depth of his disinformation delusions
ChatGPT-Image-Aug-4-2026-09_31_50-AM-2
Viewpoint: Could the U.S. become dependent on China to develop critical new genetic and drug therapies?
glp menu logo outlined

Get news on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.