Did you read my comment? I read the article and responded to a comment overemphasizing the importance of determining race from DNA. > So we can see that not o

Did you read my comment? I read the article and responded to a comment overemphasizing the importance of determining race from DNA. > So we can see that not only are the classes used more precise than just "black" or "white", but there is empirical evidence that they can be predicted from DNA. There is no implication from my comment denying the ability to derive an individual's race from DNA. Nor would I ever suggest that you could not predict race using DNA, I am simply questioning the value of doing so. Information from DNA is extremely precise, so diluting the information to interpret race is degrading its potential. As pointed out by others, the human categorization of race is an inaccurate, archaic taxonomy. Even using the law enforcement aspect of the Wired article, you can clearly demonstrate why race is an antiquated distinction to make when evaluating DNA. If you have more information from DNA, why stop at race? Technology is developing to render facial models from DNA. IMO that is a far superior use of DNA than determining, "Your guy could be African-American or Afro-Caribbean, but there is no chance that this is a Caucasian."