> like the concept of biological races itself There's a lot of misinformation about this, and it often conflates the debate about DNA diversity with a semantic

> like the concept of biological races itself There's a lot of misinformation about this, and it often conflates the debate about DNA diversity with a semantic debate about the word 'race'. Leaving aside the notion of 'race', there is ample evidence of clusters humans with more shared DNA that broadly lines up with what humans usually perceive as 'race'. As evidence of that, you can do a genetic test and with high confidence predict what race the subject SELF-identifies as. ...but that 2nd part is less important than the recognition that there are clusters of humans with slightly different DNA. Irrespective of how they identify, these differences provide insight into the relative function of those different genes. These differences should be studied, but are not because the notion that there might be differences between humans risks reinforcing racist ideologies. This is academia only researching the lowest common denominator of scientific good.