Re-analyzed APOL1 kidney data support new ethics of ‘race’

OBJECTIVES Research on ‘racial’ differences and racialized diseases often stresses genetics over social conditions, perhaps because some medical journals limit (or exclude) as social ‘Commentary’ discussion of ‘race’ as a proxy for social determinants of health. Yet, anthropology research shows that ‘race’ is socially constructed. From before birth, persistent US ‘racial’ segregation racializes health, education, employment, and access.

We hypothesized that selective recruitment into US military service, equal opportunity for military training and jobs, and earned access to Veterans Administration Healthcare could mitigate ‘racial’ differences created by racialized early-life deprivations and harms (i.e., social determinants of health). We examined veteran status and the starkest ‘racial’ disparity in healthcare—chronic kidney disease.

METHODS First, we defined terms to ensure cross-cultural clarity by orienting international colleagues to the semantics of socially constructed ‘race’ (in Europe) and overt and subtle racialization of health (in the US). Second, we removed ‘race correction’ from estimated glomerular filtration rate and kidney failure under more equal conditions of US veterans. Third, we used data re-analysis and close examination of social cofactors to suggest alternative mechanisms for links between socially constructed ‘race’, apolipoprotein L1 gene variants, and racialized kidney disease.

RESULTS Our research found no ‘racial’ disparity in kidney failure under more equal social conditions and that geographically localized “ancestry markers” may proxy for ‘race’. ‘Colorism’ may be associated with apolipoprotein L1 variants linked to ‘racial’ (e.g., pigmentary) genes.

CONCLUSIONS Under equal conditions, comparable outcomes should be the expected norm for all, regardless of socially constructed ‘race’, ethnicity, or nationality. Disparity between socially constructed categories implies disparate social conditions. International collaboration to discourage misuse of socially constructed ‘race’ in medical care and research is an actionable Population Health initiative with potentially high impact but low effort and cost.

STRENGTHS OF THIS STUDY

1. Reminds readers of cross-cultural conflicts in socially constructed ‘race’.

2. Introduces international observers to racialization of health in the US.

3. Re-analyzes socially constructed ‘race’ under more equal conditions.

4. Applies new ethics, recommended by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, to older research on socially constructed ‘race’.