By ALAN PERSHEIMER-HUNTBERG, Associated Press WriterThe use of race is one of the most common uses for biological terminology in the biomedical world, but there is no evidence that the use of that term has anything to do with racial superiority.
A review published last year in the Journal of Evolutionary Psychology suggests the word is biologically misleading, because it suggests that a person’s race is a biological marker that distinguishes them from a group of similar-looking people.
It’s not, said the researchers, and that’s because race is an evolutionary concept.
They said the term “race” is a misnomer.
“It’s more accurate to say that race is something that’s culturally constructed, something that people have to figure out for themselves,” said researcher Christopher H. Johnson, an associate professor at the University of Virginia who wrote the study.
Race is a social construct that can be shaped by social conventions and cultural norms, such as race and gender.
The concept of race has a long history in American history, but it was first coined by American sociologist and historian Joseph E. Johnson in his 1913 book, “Race and Its Discontents,” which was widely used to promote racial equality.
It has been used in popular culture, particularly by writers and athletes.
Johnson wrote that the term refers to “the racial differences of the human race, their differences from the other races, and the way they differ in their social status.”
The concept of racial superiority is often used by proponents of a range of social justice causes, including women’s equality, climate change, gay rights, and gun control.
But that argument doesn’t make much sense, Johnson said.
“The whole concept of the social construction of race comes from the idea of the biological difference between a group, in this case humans, and an entirely different group, animals,” he said.
“It’s just that biological differences are more important to the concept of social inequality than social class.
So that’s the way to get around that biological concept.”
In a 2010 review, “Racism and Biological Variability in the Human Genome: The Case of Human Race,” a team of researchers led by Michael P. Pankratz of Harvard Medical School published an analysis of genetic data from more than 8,500 Americans.
They found that a significant number of people who identify as African-American are more likely to have “narrow” variants in their DNA that are found in people of other races.
Researchers who examined DNA from more more than 2,000 people in England, Germany, and Australia found that “white” people are more genetically similar to people of different races than “black” people.
And there is good evidence that “race biological” and “race inferiority” are biologically misleading terms, according to Johnson.
“What people really mean by race biological is race is biologically fixed, and race is biological, but race is not,” he told The Associated Press.
“Race biological is used to explain why some people are black or white, but people actually do have a lot of racial differences, and they do not reflect biological differences.”
The idea that racial differences are genetic is a “dangerous oversimplification of human biology,” Johnson said, because genetic differences do not explain all differences.
“Race biological would be a better word,” he added.
Johnson’s research also found that people of Asian descent are more than twice as likely as white people to have mutations that were “mixed in origin.”
Those mutations are common in people who are members of the Pacific Islander (PEI) group, which is largely non-white and is often described as being “brown.”
The genetic differences between white people and people of mixed ancestry were found in more than 40 percent of the people studied, compared with 13 percent of people of African descent.
“If you look at a whole bunch of genetic variants that are common among populations, they don’t all have the same effect,” said Johnson.
“What happens is the population gets more and more diverse, and more and different people get those variants, so there’s more variation among populations.”
Johnson said race biological does not accurately describe what’s happening in people’s genomes.
“When we say we have a genetic difference, we’re talking about genes and their expression,” he explained.
“We’re not talking about what’s going on in your body or how your genes are doing it.
That’s a different thing.”
The term “races” can also be used to describe groups of people with similar genes.
For example, people of the East Asian ethnic group have a gene that codes for a protein called an alpha-actinin gene.
The gene is found in about 10 percent of Asians, but the gene has the same expression as that of people from East Africa, which has about 1 percent of East Asian ancestry.
“I would say, I think, that the word race biological doesn’t accurately describe the genetic differences among different groups,” Johnson added. “If you