Interview with Ute Harms
“It is important to understand that external influences can affect genetic predispositions.”
Why social, political and economic factors should not be ignored in human genetics - nor in biology lessons
Researchers argue in an article in the journal Science that socio-political factors should be given greater consideration in human genetics - both in studies and in school lessons. Ute Harms, Director of the IPN Department of Biology Education, is co-author of the article and explains in an interview with the IPN Journal what implications this has for school lessons.
IPN Journal: The focus of the biology education section of the journal Science is on the use of the term “race” in human genetics. Was this term not rightly deleted from the field of human genetics?
Prof. Dr. Ute Harms: The term “race” has caused a lot of suffering in the past and is unfortunately still of social relevance, which is extremely problematic. From a biological point of view, the concept of race cannot be applied to humans and is not scientifically tenable. This is also illustrated, for example, by the Leopoldina's statement on evolutionary biology education from 2017.
Biology education is no longer limited to the biological perspective, but also addresses the social, political and individual consequences that can result from the application of the concept of race to humans. However, these socio-political aspects are often excluded or only marginally considered in higher education teaching in the biosciences. This creates the risk that students do not understand the relevance of the non-biological dimensions and the potential consequences of using the concept of race - both for individuals and for society as a whole - or do not understand them in a sufficiently differentiated way.
This is why we recommend that social and political influences be given greater consideration in university teaching of human biology and genetics. It is important to understand that external circumstances, such as poverty, can influence health development and even genetic predisposition. For example, poor nutrition, which is more common in economically disadvantaged circumstances, often leads to health problems. Particularly in countries such as the USA, people with black skin color live disproportionately in socially disadvantaged circumstances - not for biological reasons, but as a result of social and political structures.
»Especially in countries like the USA, people with black skin color live disproportionately in socially disadvantaged circumstances - not for biological reasons, but as a result of social and political structures.«
IPN Journal: The article focuses primarily on the US education sector. Do you also see a need to adapt the teaching of genetics in schools in Germany, and if so, what changes do you think would be necessary?
Prof. Dr. Ute Harms: A critical point - also in Germany - is that genetics lessons can easily lead to deterministic ideas among the students. This means that they could wrongly assume that the presence of a certain gene has inevitable consequences. For example, they might assume that a mutated gene that codes for breast cancer will inevitably lead to the disease. But this is false in that it is only a probability that is dependent on other factors such as diet, physical fitness and mental health.
It becomes clear here that social and economic aspects also play a role. In my opinion, textbooks and other teaching materials should emphasize this connection more clearly. I also wonder whether the introduction to genetics via Mendel's rules should not be changed, as they promote this deterministic understanding. And this topic should also be given greater consideration in the training of biology teachers.
»Back then, it was assumed that genes alone were responsible for traits. Today we know that environmental factors also play a crucial part.«
IPN Journal: What reflections do you encourage?
Prof. Dr. Ute Harms: Genetic discoveries should be embedded in their historical context in biology lessons. The Human Genome Project of the 1990s is an example of this. At that time, it was assumed that genes alone were responsible for characteristics. Today we know that environmental factors also play a crucial part.
A sad example is the great famine in the Netherlands during the Second World War, in which approximately 20,000 people starved to death within a short period of time. These events led to epigenetic changes that even influenced subsequent generations.
Students should also look at current studies to understand socio-political contexts and examine science critically.
IPN Journal: Thank you for the interview.
About Prof. Dr. Ute Harms:
Prof. Dr. Ute Harms is a director at the IPN and Professor of Biology Education at Kiel University. Her research interests include the teaching and learning of evolution and genetics.
Further Sources:
Duncan, R.G., Krishnamoorthy, R., Harms, U., Haskel-Ittah, M., Kampourakis, K., Gericke, N., Hammann, M., Jimenez-Aleixandre, M., Nehm, R.H., Reiss, M.J., & Yarden, A. (2024). The sociopolitical in human genetics education. Education must go beyond only countering essentialist and deterministic views of genetics. Science, 383 (6685), 826-828. https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adi8227
Auch in der Sendung „Forschung aktuell“ im Deutschlandfunk wurde die Studie thematisiert: Wildermuth, V. (2024, 23. Februar): Mit dem Genetik-Lehrplan Rassismus vorbeugen [Forschung aktuell]. Deutschlandfunk. https://www.deutschlandfunk.de/biodidaktik-wie-genetik-vermitteln-um-rassismus-vorzubeugen-dlf-5abc1a1a-100.html
