All the way from the mutation-rich white Europeans, we move our research to the USA, and then we still study … whites of European descent? … and only coincidentally, enveloping regions on both continents known to be influenced by founder effect?
As far as bias and absence of bias is concerned …
- There are more similarities than differences between the white Europeans in Europe and the white European descendants in Pennsylvania.
- There are more similarities than differences between founder effect in The Netherlands’ and founder effect in Lancaster, PA.
With this new Pennsylvania study, the important questions from the European studies are not eliminated; they now require greater emphasis. Why Pennsylvania? Why 98.4% Whites of European descent? Why include a region with known founder effect? Why not choose a region within the USA that is representative of the demographics of the USA as a whole? Or at least, why not secure a representation of the whole USA through inclusion of a random selection of the non-whites already present in the database of “GHS active patients”?
Otherwise, stop claiming relevance to the “general population” in PR. And remove the blanket-statement that “FH is twice as common as it was thought to be” — a fuller disclosure translates that statement into a truism: An uncommon approach to FH prevalence yields uncommon results.
(For more on the industry’s use of The Netherlands and founder effect, click here.)