The Other Obama

Decoding DNA
Sharon Begley is great at making complex science easily digestible for laypeople like myself. But in her Dec. 1 column, "When DNA Is Not Destiny," she refers to DNA as something we can modify. She suggests that just because DNA doesn't change, this "doesn't mean that it cannot change" and says that "DNA is not an inert set of blueprints." But people can't change their DNA any more than a skyscraper can change its original design. The "coding" remains perfectly intact whether a person is a fetus, a senior citizen or a 10,000-year-old mummy. It is how our genes express themselves that can change—not the DNA itself. Begley rightfully demonstrates that traits such as personality, intelligence and shyness are not etched in stone. I agree that a timid child can become an extrovert and a selfish person can become altruistic. But this is not because of gene manipulation. To the contrary, one could argue that it was the child's genetic makeup in the first place that gave him the ability to better adapt to his environment by making the most beneficial changes.
William Fahber
Villennes-Sur-Seine, France

Special thanks to Sharon Begley for her incisive column "When DNA Is Not Destiny" (Dec. 1). Her point about the complex interaction between environmental and genetic factors in shaping human behavior is one of the most misunderstood by both the media and the public. Had she had the space, Begley could have filled the magazine with further supporting evidence. I wish to add only that this perspective completely destroys the racist myths concerning the genetic superiority of one group over another.
Thomas F. Pettigrew
Professor of Social Psychology
University of California, Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz, California

© 2009