Q&A with Alondra Nelson
By Misha Angrist,
Genome Magazine
| 03. 30. 2017
Why did you choose to examine African-Americans’ approach to genetic ancestry in The Social Life of DNA?
Given the Tuskegee syphilis experiment, given the history of eugenics, one of the curiosities for me was why in the world would African-Americans put their saliva in an envelope and expect that they’re going to get anything meaningful for their lives or their history [from a genetic ancestry] test? That became the puzzle of the book.
What did you learn?
That there were all sorts of complicated answers. The African-American genealogists I spoke with were not only suspicious, they were also curious — they were science geeks. I thought if they knew better, then they would do better. But what they said was, “Look, we know this history [of Tuskegee and eugenics] and we’re going into this with that history in mind, and we’ll take that into account as we negotiate and think about the results we get back.”
What does it mean for DNA to have a “social life?”
Initially, I thought I was talking about racial identity and ethnic identity. And...
Related Articles
By Annika Inampudi, Science | 07.10.2025
Before a baby in the United States reaches a few days old, doctors will run biochemical tests on a few drops of their blood to catch certain genetic diseases that need immediate care to prevent brain damage or other serious...
By Geoffrey A. Fowler, The Washington Post | 07.17.2025
Nearly 2 million people protected their privacy by deleting their DNA from 23andMe after it declared bankruptcy in March. Now it’s back with the same person in charge — and I still don’t trust it.
Nor do the attorneys general...
By Elizabeth Dwoskin and Yeganeh Torbati, The Washington Post | 07.16.2025
A group of well-heeled, 30-something women sat down to dinner last spring at a table set with pregnancy-friendly mocktails and orchids, ready to hear a talk about how to optimize their offspring.
Noor Siddiqui, the founder of an embryo-screening start-up...
By Suzanne O'Sullivan, New Scientist | 07.09.2025
Rare diseases are often hard to spot. They can evade detection until irreversible organ damage or disability has already set in. Last month, in the hope of preventing just this type of harm, the UK’s health secretary, Wes Streeting, announced...