# Critique this: Why blacks run faster **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 6, 2012, 1:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/critique-this-why-blacks-run-faster/627414 "2012-07-06T13:42:08Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 11
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2012, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/critique-this-why-blacks-run-faster/627414/201 "2012-07-07T19:54:34Z")
You might also get into the cultural phenomenon that among Canadian hockey players the best players tend to be those who have birthdays in June beginning of the year and that there are very few great hockey players who have birthdays at the end if the year. ---
**Author:** ![Polerius](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/d78d45/32.png) [@Polerius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polerius)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2012, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/critique-this-why-blacks-run-faster/627414/202 "2012-07-07T20:02:51Z")
> [@Acsenray](#): > > You say because running is a lot more popular in certain countries where there happen to be majorities of black people The US doesn’t have a majority of black people. But it still has a big share of 100m finalists. ---
**Author:** ![treis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bc79bd/32.png) [@treis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/treis)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2012, 8:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/critique-this-why-blacks-run-faster/627414/203 "2012-07-07T20:09:18Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > First, let’s start with this quote from your cite: > > But can you quote the part where this methodology was used: “that guy looks black” is good enough as a proxy for “that guy is primarily descended from West African slaves” I am not going to look, but I am reasonably certain they used self report. Anyways, if you want to say that the writer of the article that I quoted can’t properly identify race or that racial identification doesn’t correlate well with ethnic origin then fine, just do that. It’s ridiculous, but if that’s what you want to argue, go ahead. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2012, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/critique-this-why-blacks-run-faster/627414/204 "2012-07-07T20:26:44Z")
> [@Polerius](#): > > The US doesn’t have a majority of black people. But it still has a big share of 100m finalists. The list of the world’s elite athletes is unlikely to constitute a valid statistical sample for the purposes of studying genetics. In this case simple historical accident or coincidence is a much more plausible explanation. When you’re talking about top athletes you’re talking about a tiny group of people. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2012, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/critique-this-why-blacks-run-faster/627414/205 "2012-07-07T20:30:24Z")
> [@Polerius](#): > > Out of curiosity, if you’re watching a documentary on the history of the 100m dash in the Olympics with your 6-year-old kid, and he notices that for the past, say 30 years, the 100m final has consisted only of blacks, and your 6-year-old asks “Dad, why aren’t there ever any whites in this event?” what do you say? Do you explain that there is no scientifically accepted answer, and that it’s mostly cultural? I’d say the truth. We don’t know. It might be genetic. It might be cultural. It might be some combination of the two. What I wouldn’t do is say: Well, what you’re seeing is proof that blacks run faster than whites. **treis** : It’s not clear what criteria were used, but what’s more important is that it’s not clear there was even postulated to be a genetic, rather the cultural, phenomenon that was being observed. But anyone who would use “he looks black” as a way of classifying someone genetically isn’t engaged in science. ---
**Author:** ![treis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bc79bd/32.png) [@treis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/treis)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2012, 8:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/critique-this-why-blacks-run-faster/627414/206 "2012-07-07T20:40:07Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > **treis** : It’s not clear what criteria were used, but what’s more important is that it’s not clear there was even postulated to be a genetic, rather the cultural, phenomenon that was being observed. But anyone who would use “he looks black” as a way of classifying someone genetically isn’t engaged in science. Clearly absurd. Self reporting is a better method, but there’s no reason to think that visual identification has such a poor correlation to actual ethnicity to make it useless in science. Are you seriously contending that there would be a significant difference in the breakdown by position of the article I quoted if it were based on self reporting instead of that reporter’s observations and investigations? ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2012, 8:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/critique-this-why-blacks-run-faster/627414/207 "2012-07-07T20:46:46Z")
> [@treis](#): > > Clearly absurd. Self reporting is a better method, but there’s no reason to think that visual identification has such a poor correlation to actual ethnicity to make it useless in science. > > Are you seriously contending that there would be a significant difference in the breakdown by position of the article I quoted if it were based on self reporting instead of that reporter’s observations and investigations? I’m stating that someone seriously engaged in science would not use “he looks black” as a proxy for understanding someone’s ancestry. I’m stating that any such study based on that methodology would be rejected by a peer reviewed journal. That’s where you find real science. However, it probably would not be rejected by People Magazine. ---
**Author:** ![treis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bc79bd/32.png) [@treis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/treis)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2012, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/critique-this-why-blacks-run-faster/627414/208 "2012-07-07T20:50:37Z")
You didn’t answer my question. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2012, 8:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/critique-this-why-blacks-run-faster/627414/209 "2012-07-07T20:52:50Z")
You obviously have not read any actual science about race and genetics. There is essentially no useful correlation between genetics and self reporting \* particularly\* with a nearly purely social group like black Americans. Indeed there is almost no significant crossover genetically to group American blacks and Africans together. The “self reporting” races as we know them \* simply do not exist\* as genetic groups. To the extent that geneticists are able to cobble together groups based on ancestry, they have almost arbitrarily given them names like European, African, Native American, and East Asian, but those groupings do not coincide with our notions of national or continental boundaries and no not predict superficial phenotypical characteristics such as skin color, hair color, etc. in fact, black Americans have been surprised to find that genetic profiles sometimes show ZERO African ancestry resulting from such tests. Simply put, if you are seriously looking into generics factors, broad traditional races based on characteristics like skin color or self reporting is little better than drawing your assigned race from a hat. Race as you thnk of it, as something that can be self reported, is a social phenomenon, not a genetic one. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2012, 8:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/critique-this-why-blacks-run-faster/627414/210 "2012-07-07T20:57:35Z")
> [@treis](#): > > You didn’t answer my question. It doesn’t matter whether the results would be the same or different. It wouldn’t be considered good scientific methodology. It’s like I used to tell some of the guys I studied with in college as we were doing problem sets-- it doesn’t matter if you get the right answer if your methodology is wrong. Besides, it depends on the particular sample set you’re talking about. In the US, pretty much anyone with 25% or more ancestry from Africa is considered black. That leaves a whole lot of people who are genetically more European than Africa who will be classified as black, and a whole lot of people who aren’t particularly genetically similar to each other being lumped together. ---
**Author:** ![treis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bc79bd/32.png) [@treis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/treis)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2012, 8:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/critique-this-why-blacks-run-faster/627414/211 "2012-07-07T20:59:32Z")
> [@Acsenray](#): > > You obviously have not read any actual science about race and genetics. There is essentially no useful correlation between genetics and self reporting \* particularly\* with a nearly purely social group like black Americans. Indeed there is almost no significant crossover genetically to group American blacks and Africans together. > > The “self reporting” races as we know them \* simply do not exist\* as genetic groups. To the extent that geneticists are able to cobble together groups based on ancestry, they have almost arbitrarily given them names like European, African, Native American, and East Asian, but those groupings do not coincide with our notions of national or continental boundaries and no not predict superficial phenotypical characteristics such as skin color, hair color, etc. in fact, black Americans have been surprised to find that genetic profiles sometimes show ZERO African ancestry resulting from such tests. Simply put, if you are seriously looking into generics factors, broad traditional races based on characteristics like skin color or self reporting is little better than drawing your assigned race from a hat. > > Race as you thnk of it, as something that can be self reported, is a social phenomenon, not a genetic one. You’re just flat out wrong. Self reported ancestry is highly correlated with actual ethnicity: > [@](#): > > Subjects identified themselves as belonging to one of four major racial/ethnic groups (white, African American, East Asian, and Hispanic) and were recruited from 15 different geographic locales within the United States and Taiwan. Genetic cluster analysis of the microsatellite markers produced four major clusters, which showed near-perfect correspondence with the four self-reported race/ethnicity categories. Of 3,636 subjects of varying race/ethnicity, only 5 (0.14%) showed genetic cluster membership different from their self-identified race/ethnicity. > **[Genetic Structure, Self-Identified Race/Ethnicity, and Confounding in...](https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1196372/)** > > We have analyzed genetic data for 326 microsatellite markers that were typed uniformly in a large multiethnic population-based sample of individuals as part of a study of the genetics of hypertension (Family Blood Pressure Program). Subjects ... Simply put, if someone self identifies as African American, they almost certainly have genetic markers that identify their ancestry as African. As for the rest of your argument about grouping different peoples into one category, that simply makes racial identification less useful, not useless. ---
**Author:** ![treis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bc79bd/32.png) [@treis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/treis)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2012, 9:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/critique-this-why-blacks-run-faster/627414/212 "2012-07-07T21:00:44Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > It doesn’t matter whether the results would be the same or different. It wouldn’t be considered good scientific methodology. It’s like I used to tell some of the guys I studied with in college as we were doing problem sets-- it doesn’t matter if you get the right answer if your methodology is wrong. > > Besides, it depends on the particular sample set you’re talking about. In the US, pretty much anyone with 25% or more ancestry from Africa is considered black. That leaves a whole lot of people who are genetically more European than Africa who will be classified as black, and a whole lot of people who aren’t particularly genetically similar to each other being lumped together. You still didn’t answer my question. ---
**Author:** ![Iggy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iggy/32/3364_2.png) [@Iggy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Iggy)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2012, 9:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/critique-this-why-blacks-run-faster/627414/213 "2012-07-07T21:05:14Z")
The slave trade (as a centuries’ long event) can clearly be viewed as a selective event for population genetics purposes. Discrete events within the context of the slave trade could be considered selective events. There do not have to be races for this to be so. One example that might be easily understood: In the people on one particular slave ship some might be herterozygous for a mutant CFTR gene which confers some protection against fluid loss to diarrhea. Such illness outbreaks were not unheard of in the Middle Passage. In an outbreak of illness such a trait will not necessarily protect everyone with that genetic makeup, but so long as persons with that trait are more likely survive to pass on their genes on average then there is positive selective pressure. Anything heritable that would allow carriers of that trait to survive disproportionately would be enhanced in frequency in the next generation. That is how selective pressure works. Some people have a [higher fast twitch to slow twitch muscle fiber ratio](http://sportsmedicine.about.com/od/anatomyandphysiology/a/MuscleFiberType.htm). Such a person _might_ have had a fitness advantage in the era of the slave trade and thus left more descendants. But it is not required because of a different mechanism, genetic drift. When establishing a new isolated population, the potential for [genetic drift](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_drift) arises. This is a somewhat separate idea from a selected trait. The slave trade took some people from various areas in West Africa and relocated them forcibly to the New World. These enslaved peoples could not continue to interbreed with the parent population. Their opportunities to interbreed in the New World were limited by geographic isolation, having been sold in various islands or cities on the mainland. This is the recipe for a [founder effect](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Founder_effect) if I’ve ever seen one. If, purely by chance, the proportion of persons enslaved in Jamaica had a higher incidence of high fast twitch muscle fiber ratio (as compared to thier home population(s) in Africa) then that trait could have increased in frequency simply by chance. Cultural differences certainly may provide opportunity to identify those with genetic gifts in one way or another. But it is not entirely unreasonable to think that a population may have, on average, a greater proportion of persons with high fast twitch muscle fiber ratios. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2012, 9:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/critique-this-why-blacks-run-faster/627414/214 "2012-07-07T21:05:58Z")
> [@treis](#): > > You still didn’t answer my question. Yes I did. I don’t know how the results would differ between a study that used scientific methodologies and one that used folk-science methodologies. They might match up and they might not. Folk-science isn’t repeatable, so you can’t use it to make predictions. That’s one thing that distinguishes it from actual science. The latter can be used to make predictions. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2012, 9:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/critique-this-why-blacks-run-faster/627414/215 "2012-07-07T21:48:10Z")
I have one question about the OP: **who the hell is Freddie Fredericks?** Because if the quoted article meant _Frankie_ Fredericks, he isn’t even West African… ---
**Author:** ![treis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bc79bd/32.png) [@treis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/treis)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2012, 10:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/critique-this-why-blacks-run-faster/627414/216 "2012-07-07T22:16:57Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Yes I did. No, you didn’t. You said the difference didn’t matter, which isn’t an answer to “do you think the result would be different?”. > [@John Mace](#): > > I don’t know how the results would differ between a study that used scientific methodologies and one that used folk-science methodologies. They might match up and they might not. Folk-science isn’t repeatable, so you can’t use it to make predictions. That’s one thing that distinguishes it from actual science. The latter can be used to make predictions. To be clear, your answer to: > [@treis](#): > > Are you seriously contending that there would be a significant difference in the breakdown by position of the article I quoted if it were based on self reporting instead of that reporter’s observations and investigations? Is that you don’t know? You can’t even hazard a guess for us? ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2012, 10:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/critique-this-why-blacks-run-faster/627414/217 "2012-07-07T22:22:42Z")
> [@PrettyVacant](#): > > I think I’ll try another board for views on Johnson’s presentation. Thanks all. I notice that you have rather assiduously avoided reading my critique of his rather silly confabulation. Maybe a board where they have less knowledge of actual history really would suit you better. 😛 ---
**Author:** ![PrettyVacant](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/49beb7/32.png) [@PrettyVacant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PrettyVacant)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2012, 10:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/critique-this-why-blacks-run-faster/627414/218 "2012-07-07T22:26:32Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > I notice that you have rather assiduously avoided reading my critique of his rather silly confabulation. Maybe a board where they have less knowledge of actual history really would suit you better. 😛 Sorry, I didn’t rate it. > [@Iggy](#): > > The slave trade (as a centuries’ long event) can clearly be viewed as a selective event for population genetics purposes. Discrete events within the context of the slave trade could be considered selective events. There do not have to be races for this to be so. > > One example that might be easily understood: > In the people on one particular slave ship some might be herterozygous for a mutant CFTR gene which confers some protection against fluid loss to diarrhea. Such illness outbreaks were not unheard of in the Middle Passage. In an outbreak of illness such a trait will not necessarily protect everyone with that genetic makeup, but so long as persons with that trait are more likely survive to pass on their genes on average then there is positive selective pressure. > > Anything heritable that would allow carriers of that trait to survive disproportionately would be enhanced in frequency in the next generation. That is how selective pressure works. > > Some people have a [higher fast twitch to slow twitch muscle fiber ratio](http://sportsmedicine.about.com/od/anatomyandphysiology/a/MuscleFiberType.htm). Such a person _might_ have had a fitness advantage in the era of the slave trade and thus left more descendants. But it is not required because of a different mechanism, genetic drift. > > When establishing a new isolated population, the potential for [genetic drift](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_drift) arises. This is a somewhat separate idea from a selected trait. > > The slave trade took some people from various areas in West Africa and relocated them forcibly to the New World. These enslaved peoples could not continue to interbreed with the parent population. Their opportunities to interbreed in the New World were limited by geographic isolation, having been sold in various islands or cities on the mainland. This is the recipe for a [founder effect](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Founder_effect) if I’ve ever seen one. > > If, purely by chance, the proportion of persons enslaved in Jamaica had a higher incidence of high fast twitch muscle fiber ratio (as compared to thier home population(s) in Africa) then that trait could have increased in frequency simply by chance. > Cultural differences certainly may provide opportunity to identify those with genetic gifts in one way or another. But it is not entirely unreasonable to think that a population may have, on average, a greater proportion of persons with high fast twitch muscle fiber ratios. This is very helpful. Thanks for taking the time. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2012, 10:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/critique-this-why-blacks-run-faster/627414/219 "2012-07-07T22:31:33Z")
> [@PrettyVacant](#): > > Sorry, I didn’t rate it. Well, I agree that the beat was slow and I doubt that you could dance to it, but it was based directly on your OP, so I would have thought that it had some interest for you. ---
**Author:** ![clairobscur](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/839c29/32.png) [@clairobscur](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/clairobscur)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2012, 10:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/critique-this-why-blacks-run-faster/627414/220 "2012-07-07T22:38:53Z")
> [@Ibn\_Warraq](#): > > Of course most of those athletes you’re alluding to are of European heritage as well. > > A more accurate analysis would note the the world’s dominant sprinters are “blacks” from the US, Canada, and Jamaica, countries which contain a tiny fraction of the world’s population that is of African ancestry and completely excludes countries such as the Dominican Republic, Cuba, Venezuela with as large or larger West African populations and countries like Brazil with vastly larger West African populations. And I repeat my counter-argument : where “world-dominant” sprinters are from doesn’t really matter in this debate. Because there are many other variables that might explain why a given country has or does not have world -class sprinters. Mainly how much is spend on sports in the country and how popular this particular sport is. If it weren’t the case, the most obvious evidence that west-Africans don’t have an hedge in short distance races would be to point at the definite lack of Senegalese world champions. What matters again is whether or not the best sprinters in a given country tend to be of west-African ancestry. Not “are there many world champions from Venezuela?” But “what is the ancestry of the Venezuelan national champions?” [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/critique-this-why-blacks-run-faster/627414.md?page=10) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/critique-this-why-blacks-run-faster/627414.md?page=12)