Genetic aspects of population policy

Reflections on the Historiography of American Eugenics: Trends, Fractures, Tensions

By the 1950s, eugenics had lost its scientific status; it now belonged to the context rather than to the content of science. Interest in the subject was also at low ebb. But that situation would soon change dramatically. Indeed, in an essay-review published in 1993, Philip Pauly commented that a "eugenics industry" had come to rival the "Darwin industry" in importance, although the former seemed less integrated than the latter. Since then, the pace of publication on eugenics, including American eugenics, has only accelerated, while the field has become even more fractured, moving in multiple and even contradictory directions. This essay explores the trajectory of work on the history of American eugenics since interest in the subject revived in the 1960s, noting trends and also fractures. The latter are seen to result partly from the fact that professional historians no longer own the subject, which has attracted the interest of scholars in several other disciplines as well as scientists, political activists, and journalists, and also from the fact that the history of eugenics has almost always been policy-oriented. Historians' desire to be policy-relevant and at the same time attentive to context, complexity, and contingency has generated tensions at several levels: within individuals, among historians, and between professional historians and others who also engage with the history of eugenics. That these tensions are resolved differently by different authors and even by the same authors at different times helps explain why the fragmentation that Pauly noted is not likely to be overcome anytime soon.

Recollections of James Neel

In his long and influential career Neel contributed to almost all aspects of genetic epidemiology from mutation to ethical and philosophical issues. His research spanned North America, Japan, Africa, and Latin America in a fascinating equipoise among clinical, biochemical, epidemiological, and molecular studies that have stimulated hundreds of researchers who enjoyed the controversies he generated as much as the insights he provided. Without exception, we treasure recollections of a high-principled and warm-hearted colleague whose field studies were a model for their generation.

Implications of the Human Genome Project for obstetrics and gynecology

The initial sequencing of the human genome should be regarded as a milestone in a road that stretches years into the future; the full ramifications of the Human Genome Project are still only being theorized. Researchers will benefit from the catalog of human genes in studies of the genetics of disease susceptibility and the cell biology of gene interactions. Clinicians will increasingly offer genetic or biochemical testing to identify those at highest risk for a number of diseases. Drug discovery will eventually follow newly possible studies of gene expression and protein function. However the Human Genome Project eventually shapes medicine, it is certain that physicians, particularly obstetricians and gynecologists, will need to be well versed in the scientific and ethical issues involved, inasmuch as we will likely be at the center of the most heated debates.