Donald Trump lashes out at Elizabeth Warren over DNA test, calls her ‘phony!’
President Donald Trump lashed out at Sen. Elizabeth Warren on Tuesday over DNA test results she released that indicate she has some Native American heritage, saying she is “getting slammed” over what he claimed is “a scam and a lie” despite Warren’s proof. Trump called on his potential 2020 Democratic challenger to apologize and claimed that even the Cherokee Nation “denies her.” Warren released the test results Monday in part to push back against Trump’s taunts about her claim of Native American ancestry. The results provide some evidence that a Native American is in her bloodline, though the ancestor probably lived six to 10 generations ago, according to the analysis. An ancestor six generations removed would make Warren 1/64th Native American while an ancestor as much as 10 generations removed would render the Massachusetts Democrat only 1/1024th Native American, according to Blaine Bettinger, a genealogist and author who specializes in DNA evidence. Trump, who belittles Warren by calling her “Pocahontas,” seized on the conclusion in a series of tweets early Tuesday. “Pocahontas (the bad version), sometimes referred to as Elizabeth Warren, is getting slammed,” he wrote. “She took a bogus DNA test and it showed that she may be 1/1024, far less than the average American. Now Cherokee Nation denies her, “DNA test is useless.” Even they don’t want her. Phony!” Cherokee Nation Secretary of State Chuck Hoskin Jr. said Monday that DNA tests are useless in determining tribal citizenship, which is determined by tribal nations. Hoskin accused Warren of “undermining tribal interests with her continued claims of tribal heritage.” Warren acknowledged in a tweet Monday that DNA and family history have nothing to do with tribal affiliation or citizenship, which is determined by tribal nations. “I respect the distinction, & don’t list myself as Native in the Senate,” she said. Others questioned Warren’s decision to raise the issue so close to an election in which her party is focused on regaining control of the U.S. House. “Now that her claims of being of Indian heritage have turned out to be a scam and a lie, Elizabeth Warren should apologize for perpetrating this fraud against the American Public,” Trump said in another tweet that ignored the evidence of her Native American background, however small the percentage. Trump thanked the Cherokee Nation “for revealing that Elizabeth Warren, sometimes referred to as Pocahontas, is a complete and total Fraud!” Hoskin, in his statement, did not refer to Warren as a “fraud.” Trump also claimed Tuesday that Harvard, where Warren has taught law, called her “a person of color” (amazing con), and would not have taken her otherwise!” There is no evidence that Harvard ever publicly described her in that manner. Charles Fried, the Harvard law professor who recruited Warren, has said any suggestion that she got her job in part because of a claim of minority status is “totally stupid, ignorant, uniformed and simply wrong.” Fried said Monday that when he presented her case to the faculty “I did not mention her Native American connection because I did not know about it.” Trump had offered over the summer to donate $1 million to Warren’s favorite charity if a DNA test proved her Native American bloodline. On Monday, Trump first denied ever making such a promise. He later upped the ante by saying “I’ll only do it if I can test her personally.” “That will not be something I enjoy doing either,” he added. Warren tweeted that Trump is a “cowardly elitist” and that she “won’t sit quietly for Trump’s racism” so she took the test. She also said he makes “creepy physical threats” about women who scare him, including her. “He’s trying to do what he always does to women who scare him: call us names, attack us personally, shrink us down to feel better about himself,” Warren said on Twitter. “It may soothe his ego – but it won’t work.” She said she released the results “because I’ve got nothing to hide. What are YOU hiding, @realDonaldTrump?” she wrote. “Release your tax returns – or the Democratic-led House will do it for you soon enough. Tick-tock, Mr President.” Warren was referring to the Nov. 6 election, when Democrats hope to regain control of the House, which would put them in position to examine and possibly publicly release Trump’s income tax returns. Trump has bucked decades of precedent by refusing to release the returns. Republished with permission from the Associated Press.
Alabama Power Foundation awards $150,000 grant to HudsonAlpha
The Alabama Power Foundation has awarded a $150,000 grant to the HudsonAlpha Institute of Biotechnology to help expand gene research education to students across Alabama. HundsonAlpha plans to grow its new program, Characterizing Our DNA Exceptions (CODE), by engaging small groups of college students with authentic genomic research. The students will computationally analyze DNA variants – a practice known as bioinformatics – from real-world, anonymous clinical samples. Current sequencing technologies make it possible to obtain the entire genetic code of an individual in a matter of days. Often, the process detects DNA variants, or genetic changes, that are not well understood because they have not been studied. These changes are known as variants of uncertain significance, or a VUS. The HudsonAlpha Institute for Biotechnology will use a $150,000 Alabama Power Foundation grant to expand bioinformatics to colleges throughout the state. (Getty Images) “A VUS undergoes extensive analysis and testing to determine whether it has a role in the development of a trait or disease, a process that is very time-consuming,” said Michele Morris, Workforce Development lead at HudsonAlpha. “Because of this, VUS interpretation has historically been conducted in larger universities. Through CODE, we want to lower those access barriers.” In doing so, HudsonAlpha is collaborating with five Alabama colleges and universities across a broader scope of academia. Schools range from nonprofit, to large community colleges, historically black colleges and universities (HBCUs), and liberal arts: Alabama College of Osteopathic Medicine Alabama State University Birmingham-Southern College Lawson State Community College Wallace State Community College Each school will select a faculty member to serve as program adviser who will then select five to 10 students to participate in CODE. HudsonAlpha researchers and educators are hosting a two-day workshop for advisers May 14-15. Dr. Jeremy Prokop presents at a workshop at HudsonAlpha to prepare advisers in the Characterizing Our DNA Exceptions (CODE) program. (HudsonAlpha) “It has always been the mission of the Alabama Power Foundation to support advances in our state. As technology continues to evolve and innovation is more vital than ever, it is important that we continue to expose Alabama’s students to cutting-edge initiatives to ensure their success,” said Myla Calhoun, president of the Alabama Power Foundation. Since its creation in 1989 with funds donated by shareholders, the foundation has supported Alabama communities, educational institutions and nonprofits with nonratepayer dollars through more than 20,000 grant and scholarship awards. “Programs like this one can be real game changers for these students, and we are proud to provide support,” Calhoun said. Pilot schools will participate in CODE for the 2018-2019 academic year. Students will present their work at a pilot group symposium in March 2019. Following the initial experience, pilot schools will be eligible to continue participation for a second year. This fall, HudsonAlpha will begin recruiting 25 more schools. “Enormous amounts of genomic data are being generated on a daily basis, so CODE participants will have access to that data and work to characterize newly identified DNA variants,” said Neil Lamb, Ph.D., vice president for Educational Outreach at HudsonAlpha. “We hope this experience will inspire more Alabama students to pursue a career in the STEM fields such as genomics and bioinformatics.” Republished with permission from the Alabama News Center.
No designer babies, but gene editing to avoid disease? Maybe
Don’t expect designer babies any time soon — but a major new ethics report leaves open the possibility of one day altering human heredity to fight genetic diseases, with stringent oversight, using new tools that precisely edit genes inside living cells. What’s called genome editing already is transforming biological research, and being used to develop treatments for patients struggling with a range of diseases. The science is nowhere near ready for a huge next step that raises ethical questions — altering sperm, eggs or embryos so that babies don’t inherit a disease that runs in the family, says a report Tuesday from the National Academy of Sciences and National Academy of Medicine. But if scientists learn how to safely pass alterations of the genetic code to future generations, the panel said “germline” editing could be attempted under strict criteria, including that it targets a serious disease with no reasonable alternative and is conducted under rigorous oversight. “Caution is absolutely needed, but being cautious does not mean prohibition,” said bioethicist R. Alta Charo of the University of Wisconsin-Madison. “This committee is not saying we will or should do germline — heritable — editing. What we are saying is that we can identify a set of strict conditions under which it would be permissible to do it,” Charo added. “But we are far, far away from being ready to try.” Genome editing should not go beyond healing the sick and enhance traits such as physical strength, what’s commonly called “designer babies,” the panel stressed. But the public should get involved in these debates now, to say what might one day be acceptable. The long-awaited report offers advice — the prestigious academies cannot set policy. But it is considered a step toward creating international norms for responsible development of this powerful technology. The U.S. National Academies and its counterparts in Britain and China have been holding international meetings with the hope of doing just that. “Genome editing is a new tool for gene therapy and it has tremendous promise,” Charo said. But, she added, it has to be pursued in a way that promotes well-being and is responsible, respectful and fair. Genome editing is essentially a biological version of cut-and-paste software, allowing scientists to turn genes on or off, repair or modify them inside living cells. There are a few older methods but one with the wonky name CRISPR-Cas9 is so much faster, cheaper and simpler to use that it has spurred an explosion of research. Under development are ways to treat a range of diseases from sickle cell and hemophilia to cancer. In lab experiments using human cells or animals engineered with humanlike disorders, scientists are unraveling how gene defects fuel disease — and are even trying to grow transplantable human organs inside pigs. That kind of research is very promising, is adequately regulated today and should continue at full speed, the National Academies panel concluded. When it comes to the more sci fi-sounding uses, it’s quite possible scientists will learn how to perform germline editing in five to 10 years, said panel co-chair Richard Hynes of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Safety is one reason for caution, he said, as scientists will have to learn whether editing one gene has unwanted downstream effects. Some critics argue that families plagued by inherited diseases already have other alternatives — adopt, use donated eggs, or undergo in vitro fertilization and discard resulting embryos that inherit the bad gene. But Charo noted that sometimes parents carry two copies of a lethal gene, guaranteeing any children inherit it. Others oppose the discarding of embryos for religious reasons. For some families, “you can see there would be strong arguments for doing it” if the other criteria are met, said Robin Lovell-Badge of Britain’s Francis Crick Institute. Some countries prohibit any germline editing research. Others, such as Britain, allow laboratory research with genome editing in embryos, not for pregnancy but to understand human development. In the U.S., scientists can perform laboratory embryo research only with private, not government, funding. Any attempt at pregnancy would require permission from the Food and Drug Administration, which is currently prohibited from using federal funds to review any such request. “The bottom line is there is no planetary government with enforcement power,” Charo noted Tuesday. Republished with permission of the Associated Press.
