- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
23 and Me helping Us understand Slavery
Posted on 7/28/20 at 11:00 am
Posted on 7/28/20 at 11:00 am
quote:
Evidence of some of the horrors of the trans-Atlantic slave trade can still be found in the DNA of African Americans today, according to new research.
Researchers from consumer genetics company 23andMe studied genetic data of more than 50,000 people and compared it to historical documentation of where people were taken from in Africa, and where they were enslaved in the Americas, said Steven Micheletti, a population geneticist at 23andMe and study co-author.
The genetic results largely matched the historical records, Micheletti said, noting that historians estimated 5.7 million people were taken from West Central Africa and his team found the strongest genetic connection between people in that region.
But researchers also found key differences that may shed light on the brutality of slavery and how it operated different in different regions, according to the study published on Thursday in the American Journal of Human Genetics.
Micheletti, for example, said he was surprised to learn that African Americans have a higher proportion of African ancestry than people of African descent in South America, even though many more enslaved people were sent to South America than the United States.
He said the potential explanation could be "two different horrible practices": In places like Brazil and Cuba, slave owners were more likely to let slaves die than worry about their health, while in the U.S., they would "essentially breed people" to maintain the enslaved workforce.
Genetic data also shows that enslaved women contributed to the present-day gene pools at a higher rate, despite the fact that more than 60% of the enslaved people who were brought to the Americas were male. In the U.S., African women contributed to the gene pool about 1.5 times more than African men. In Central America, the Latin Caribbean and parts of South America enslaved women contributed to the gene pool about 13 to 17 times more.
quote:LINK
In the U.S., slave owners promoted segregation in addition to coercing enslaved people to have children
This post was edited on 7/28/20 at 11:13 am
20
Posted on 7/28/20 at 11:02 am to tduecen
Yay?
Posted on 7/28/20 at 11:08 am to tduecen
quote:
He said the potential explanation could be "two different horrible practices": In places like Brazil and Cuba, slave owners were more likely to let slaves die than worry about their health, while in the U.S., they would "essentially breed people" to maintain the enslaved workforce.
Do these people do any actual research? Anyone with an Understanding of the history Of the Caribbean and the Americas knows that.
Chattel slavery in the US was tame compared to the horrors in the Caribbean and S America. They wound just work them to death because they could get more, while it was far more expensive in the United States. Plus it was illegal to import new slaves long before the civil war, thus they were more valuable, and better cared for.
Posted on 7/28/20 at 11:11 am to tduecen
Hate it when the first 3rd and 4th paragraphs basically say the same thing as 1st and 2nd
Posted on 7/28/20 at 11:11 am to fr33manator
quote:
Do these people do any actual research? Anyone with an Understanding of the history Of the Caribbean and the Americas knows that.
He was implying that those practices could explain the genetic discrepancies, not that the practices were newly discovered.
I swear some of y'all lose all rational thought when anyone brings up slavery.
Posted on 7/28/20 at 11:13 am to fr33manator
quote:
Do these people do any actual research?
Do you really have to ask?
Posted on 7/28/20 at 11:14 am to tduecen
quote:
where people were taken from in Africa
Did anyone point out that slavery still exists there right now today and it’s been abolished in America, the most free and most culturally and racially diverse country on planet earth, for over 150 years?
Posted on 7/28/20 at 11:16 am to tduecen
Interesting stuff, but not much we didn’t already know except for the part about women contributing more to gene pools. I suppose it’s good to have genetic proof to back up the assumptions.
Posted on 7/28/20 at 11:18 am to tduecen
quote:
...in the U.S., they would "essentially breed people" to maintain the enslaved workforce.
Jimmy the Greek was fired for saying the exact same thing.
Posted on 7/28/20 at 11:26 am to Breesus
Why would it have been mentioned?
Where is the data coming from around our racial diversity and freedom rankings?
Where is the data coming from around our racial diversity and freedom rankings?
Posted on 7/28/20 at 11:31 am to tduecen
quote:
may shed light on the brutality of slavery
Oh that's good, I was still under the impression that slavery was a good thing.
Posted on 7/28/20 at 11:32 am to Salmon
quote:
He was implying that those practices could explain the genetic discrepancies, not that the practices were newly discovered.
I swear some of y'all lose all rational thought when anyone brings up slavery.
It's kinda like an article explaining how the moon is, in fact, not made out of green cheese
Posted on 7/28/20 at 11:34 am to tduecen
quote:
In the U.S., African women contributed to the gene pool about 1.5 times more than African men. In Central America, the Latin Caribbean and parts of South America enslaved women contributed to the gene pool about 13 to 17 times more.
So, female slaves in the US were having a lot of children NOT sired by men of African descent, but in the Caribbean and other parts of the Americas, this was happening exponentially more.
Posted on 7/28/20 at 11:34 am to fr33manator
quote:
Do these people do any actual research?
What do you mean "These people"?
Posted on 7/28/20 at 11:46 am to Dingeaux
quote:
What do you mean "These people"?
The people that write these articles
Posted on 7/28/20 at 11:49 am to tduecen
DGAF about slavery. I am trying to make money and get pussy today.
Posted on 7/28/20 at 11:50 am to Salmon
quote:
He was implying that those practices could explain the genetic discrepancies, not that the practices were newly discovered.
I swear some of y'all lose all rational thought when anyone brings up slavery.
Rational thought? A rational person already knew this stuff, long long ago. Now this might have given more DNA evidence, but you didn’t really need it since the other available evidence showed it just as well.
It didn’t need to be explained again.
Posted on 7/28/20 at 11:53 am to fr33manator
quote:
It didn’t need to be explained again.
It wasn't being explained again. It explained the DNA discrepancy that was found.
Posted on 7/28/20 at 11:55 am to tduecen
quote:
Genetic data also shows that enslaved women contributed to the present-day gene pools at a higher rate, despite the fact that more than 60% of the enslaved people who were brought to the Americas were male. In the U.S., African women contributed to the gene pool about 1.5 times more than African men. In Central America, the Latin Caribbean and parts of South America enslaved women contributed to the gene pool about 13 to 17 times more.
That shouldn't be all that surprising. Males likely had harder work and poorer treatment, meaning fewer survived. Horribly and unfortunately, they also likely weren't allowing free will when it came to starting families.
You'll likely also run into something that's common throughout human history, for various reasons, which is that more individual women bear children sired by fewer individual men.
Posted on 7/28/20 at 11:59 am to High C
quote:
So, female slaves in the US were having a lot of children NOT sired by men of African descent, but in the Caribbean and other parts of the Americas, this was happening exponentially more.
I don't know if that's what they are implying, but it no doubt happened.
It's more saying that more women that were slaves passed on genes to future generations, disproportionate to their numbers, while fewer male slaves passed on their genes.
More individual women had children, fewer individual men were responsible for those children.
Edit to add:
After reading the journal article, they do examine European male influence on differences in genetics.
This post was edited on 7/28/20 at 12:16 pm
Page 1 of 3
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News