|
|
|
Disease Inheritance and Race Determination By Fingerprints (This article appeared in the August 1987 issue of Identification News)
by DONALD F. MCBRIDE Can fingerprints provide clues to the possibility of inheriting certain diseases or determining a person's race? To provide accurate answers to these questions is troublesome. Persons engaged in the everyday occupation of fingerprint identification are essential to providing practical routine fingerprint services and do not have the luxury to conduct detailed studies in these matters. Out of necessity, they must rely on research conducted by others to attempt to correlate this information. For a number of years, various studies have been conducted by the medical profession regarding these topics. Some of these studies dealt with the inheritance of Schizophrenia; Mongolism; Leprosy; Alzheimer's; Neurological Disorders; Retardation; Rubella Syndrome; Huntington's Disease; and defects of the heart, brain and kidneys. These projects, for the most part, focused on the study of the frequency of fingerprint patterns as an aid in diagnosing these conditions. The fingerprints of as few as one hundred and up to five thousand individuals were used in conducting the research. The frequency of pattern type variations generally held to the accepted pattern frequencies of 5% arches, 30% whorls and 65% loops. An exception to the normal ridge detail included dissociated or aberrant ridge formations. In all case studies, there seems to have been no real effort made to determine the incidence of this condition in the general public. Numerous examples of aberrant ridge formations are known to exist in the FBI's fingerprint files, but the exact cause and significance remain unknown. The detection of ridge dissociation is not always easy to distinguish from conventional scar formations and would require a person to have experience in this kind of observation to accurately catalogue the condition in every case. It appears that the individuals conducting these research projects all lacked this experience. Additionally, it is likely that groups of persons up to five thousand are not an adequate sampling on which to establish statistical figures when compared to the total population of over 200 million in the United States alone. It was observed that, after the researchers associate what they call a peculiar pattern configuration with a particular condition, they were reluctant to assert that such a formation had a definite significance for any individual. One study was initiated to determine Mongolism, a type of congenital malformation generally involving mental retardation, utilizing certain abnormal pattern frequencies and occurrences in the fingers and palms. While findings in this study indicated some success, it is suspected the claim for diagnosis from known prints was probably made from a group of Mongoloids since the prints were furnished by medical practitioners. Also, the characteristics present in the Mongoloid's prints occur in normal individuals, but on a less frequent basis. The fingerprints of a group of schizophrenic males and females were studied with emphasis placed on the total ridge count of all ten fingers. The results purportedly found a significant difference between the total ridge counts of the schizophrenic and normal males, but no appreciable variation between the counts of the females. This study lacked stabilized and detailed fingerprint statistics for use as standards. Conclusions were based on inadequate samplings and the prevalence of the alleged abnormal characteristics in a host of normal individuals. Another research project of fingerprints was conducted, the primary intent of which was to set up an information bank on monozygotic (identical) twins in order to investigate the possible genetic factors involved in disease. Identical twins originate from a single fertilized ovum through its spontaneous division into two parts. The fingerprints of these individuals were regarded by the researchers as an aid due to similar pattern types appearing in many of the fingers of identical twins. The conclusions reached, unfortunately, do not set out statistical tables showing actual numbers and percentages of such pattern types, which obscure the ready interpretation of the actual figures. Diagnosis based on fingerprints alone had an evaluation error rate of over 26%. This error percentage would indicate that this type of diagnosis from fingerprints is at best a risky business. Dr. Harold Cummins, co--author of the book “Finger Prints, Palms and Soles”, in an address before the 44th Annual Conference of the International Association for Identification in 1959, said “There is no question about there being racial differences. The racial differences, insofar as I have been able to find them, are only statistical. For example, you probably never printed any Australian aborigines, did you? Or any Pygmies from Central Africa? Or any Bushmen from Africa? I mention those groups only because they show so concretely the kind of difference that can be made out. The incidence of whorls in the Australian aborigines is 75% of all patterns. There is no group that we know of that has so many whorls. On the other hand, if we study some of the groups of Central Africa, like the Bushmen, the Pygmies, we find the incidence of whorls drops down to maybe 15%, 16% or 18%. Now, that is a great contrast. And there are similar difference in other features, the kinds of patternings of the palm, the tendency of alignment of ridges either transversely or diagonally across the palm, all these differences are statistical. You can make them out by taking a group of a given race and comparing that group with other groups. But I am very skeptical about one being able to pick up a set of prints and saying that this is an Australian aborigine, Chinese, or what not.” To this day, those engaged in the forensic science of fingerprint identification would have to agree with this statement for it is not possible to look at any given set of fingerprints and determines a person's race. This same reasoning must also apply to fingerprint pattern statistics compiled on diseased groups. In reviewing research and studies done to date, the fact remains that it is not possible to accurately deduce a person's physical or mental makeup from his fingerprints. This statement is quite compatible with any known statistics which might show trends of pattern types in particular pathological or racial groups. In all the research conducted of this type, no questions were raised on the individuality or permanence of fingerprints nor their positive identification value. The future, with promises of advancement in modern technology, may someday hold the answers to the questions originally posed. Until then, theories regarding this matter must be viewed with some degree of skepticism.
(Editor--—Additional literature provides the following tables illustrating racial variability in pattern frequencies and variances in different studies: The article “Study Links Fingerprints to Male Homosexuality” on the link between fingerprint ridge count and sexual preference originally crossed my desk in a hasty or non--attention getting fashion. The apparent lack of a thorough understanding of fingerprints which occasionally surfaces in the academic community caused me to dismiss and discard the article. It wasn't until Tom Jones submitted it with the following astute observation and comment that I concluded the readers should have this research brought to their attention. In Tom's words: “Those of us who have studied `fingerprints' for over 20 years will not hazard a guess (out loud) as to the SEX of a finger print donor and here is a group that after the careful study of a whopping 248 sets of prints can determine SEXUAL PREFERENCE!” Thanks Tom for shining the appropriate light on this research. I reviewed the original study “Dermatoglyphic Asymmetry and Sexual Orientation in Men” by J.A.Y. Hall and D. Kimura, as published in Behavioral Neuroscience 1994, Vol. 10, No. 6, pp 1203--1206 to determine if a greater sampling than the stated 248 subject samplings were considered and none was indicated. My question is--—Don't all variables, i.e. race, disease and possibly “sexual orientation” need to be considered in a significant sampling [not 248] before conclusions, even generalities, should be given credence? Or as Mr. McBride so astutely stated “until then, theories regarding this matter must be viewed with some degree of skepticism.”)
This article was reprinted in “THE PRINT” |