3 ms·
d) survivor bias: you conveniently use the term "European" because it is now considered an integrated population, but one century ago, French people were scared
by alain94040 15y ago
d) survivor bias: you conveniently use the term "European" because it is now considered an integrated population, but one century ago, French people were scared of Italians immigrating. That's just an example. There was no such thing as being "European".
- rbanffy 15y agoYou don't need to go back a century - just think of Yugoslavia 20 years ago...
- yot 15y agoCorrect. Now imagine that you are DNA mutations A and B carried by French people and I'm mutations C and D carried by Italians. If 200 years ago 80% of the population carried mutations A and B and today only 20% of the population carry them, while 60% carry C and D. Wouldn't you say that you have lost? Two other points though: -Italian immigration wasn't anywhere near the scale of present day immigration to Europe. In other words the percentages in the example above aren't close to the real ones, however, the projection says that the percentages of European v.s. non-European genes would be as low as that or lower. -French and Italians cluster genetically right next to each other compared to current immigrating populations. Now why this makes a difference for some people, read this other comment: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2808602 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2808602