Since the sequencing of the human genome, as well as the completion of the first Human Genome Diversity Project, the benefits of studying one human population over another has been an ongoing debate relating to the replicability of findings in other populations. The leveraging of specific populations into research markets has made headlines in cases such as deCode in Iceland, Quebec Founder Population, and Generation Scotland. In such cases, researchers and policy makers have used the genetic and historical uniqueness of their populations to attract scientific, commercial and political interest. In this article, we explore how in countries with population isolates, such as Finland, the researchers balance considerations relating to the generalization and replicability of findings in small yet unique research populations to global biomedical research interests. This highlights challenges related to forms of competition associated with genetics research markets, as well as what counts as the ‘right’ population for genetic research.
AardenE (2017) Projecting and producing ’usefulness’ of biomedical research infrastructures; or why the Singapore Tissue Network closed. Science and Public Policy44(6): 753–762.
2.
AllardtE (1998) Teknologiaretoriikka suomalaisen todellisuuden konstruoimisen välineenä [Technology rhetoric as a tool for constructing Finnish reality]. Tiede & Edistys2: 85–95.
3.
Anaya-MuñozVHGarcía-DeisterVSuárez-DíazE (2017) Flattening and unpacking human genetic variation in Mexico, postwar to present. Science in Context30(1): 89–112.
4.
AndrewsLNelkinD (2001) Body Bazaar: The Market for Human Tissue in the Biotechnology Age. New York: Crown Publishers.
5.
AppiahKA (2005) The Ethics of Identity. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
6.
BenjaminR (2009) A lab of their own: Genomic sovereignty as postcolonial science policy. Policy and Society28(4): 341–355.
7.
BirneyWSoranzoN (2015) The end of the start for population sequencing. Nature526: 52–53.
8.
ChhedaHPaltaPPirinenMet al. (2017) Whole-genome view of the consequences of a population bottleneck using 2926 genome sequences from Finland and United Kingdom. European Journal of Human Genetics25(4): 477–484.
9.
EpsteinS (2007) Inclusion: The Politics of Difference in Medical Research. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
10.
FinnGen (2018) FinnGen research project is an expedition to the frontier of genomics and medicine. Available at: www.finngen.fi/en (accessed 10 January 2018).
11.
FletcherA (2004) Field of genes: The politics of science and identity in the Estonian Genome Project. New Genetics and Society23(1): 3–14.
12.
FortunM (2008) Promising Genomics: Iceland and Decode Genetics in a World of Speculation. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
13.
FrankL (2000) When an entire country is a cohort. Science287(5462): 2398–2399.
14.
FujimuraJHRajagopalanR (2011) Different differences: The use of ‘genetic ancestry’ versus race in biomedical human genetic research. Social Studies of Science41(1): 5–30.
15.
GannettL (2001) Racism and human genome diversity research: The ethical limits of ‘population thinking’. Philosophy of Science68(3): S479–S492.
16.
GibbonS (2013) Ancestry, temporality, and potentiality. Current Anthropology54(Suppl. 7): S107–S117.
17.
GibbonS (2016) Translating population difference: The use and re-use of genetic ancestry in Brazilian cancer genetics. Medical Anthropology35(1): 58–72.
18.
GibbonsA (2017) There’s no such thing as a ‘pure’ European – Or anyone else. Science. Epub ahead of print 15 May. DOI: 10.1126/science.aal1186.
19.
HästbackaJde la ChapelleAKaitilaIet al. (1992) Linkage disequilibrium mapping in isolated founder populations: Diastrophic dysplasia in Finland. Nature Genetics2(3): 204–211.
20.
Häyrinen-AlestaloMPeltolaU (2006) The problem of a market-oriented university. Higher Education52(2): 251–281.
21.
HeySP (2015) Robust and discordant evidence: Methodological lessons from clinical research. Philosophy of Science82(1): 55–75.
22.
HinterbergerA (2012) Investing in life, investing in difference: Nations, populations and genomes. Theory, Culture & Society29(3): 72–93.
23.
HinterbergerAPorterN (2015) Genomic and viral sovereignty: Tethering the materials of global biomedicine. Public Culture27(2): 361–386.
24.
HoeyerK (2016) Denmark at a crossroad? Intensified data sourcing in a research radical country. In: MittelstadtBDFloridiL (eds) The Ethics of Biomedical Big Data. Bern: Springer, 73–93.
25.
International Human Genome Sequencing Consortium (2001) Human genome. Nature409(6822): 860–921.
26.
IoannidisJPANtzaniEATrikalinosTAet al. (2001) Replication validity of genetic association studies. Nature Genetics29(3): 306–309.
27.
JorgensenTHButtenschönHNWangAGet al. (2004) The origin of the isolated population of the Faroe Islands investigated using Y chromosomal markers. Human Genetics115(1): 19–28.
28.
KentMGarcía-DeisterVLópez-BeltránCet al. (2015) Building the genomic nation: ‘Homo Brasilis’ and the ‘Genoma Mexicano’ in comparative cultural perspective. Social Studies of Science45(6): 839–861.
29.
KriegerN (2012) Who and what is a ‘population’? Historical debates, current controversies, and implications for understanding ‘population health’ and rectifying health inequalities. The Milbank Quarterly90(4): 634–681.
30.
KurkiMIGaálEIKettunenJet al. (2014) High risk population isolate reveals low frequency variants predisposing to intracranial aneurysms. PLoS Genetics10(1): e1004134.
31.
LahermoPSajantilaASistonenPet al. (1996) The genetic relationship between the Finns and the Finnish Saami (Lapps): Analysis of nuclear DNA and mtDNA. American Journal of Human Genetics58(6): 1309–1322.
32.
LaoOLuTTNothnagelMet al. (2008) Correlation between genetic and geographic structure in Europe. Current Biology18(16): 1241–1248.
33.
LappalainenTKoivumäkiSSalmelaEet al. (2006) Regional differences among the Finns: A Y-chromosomal perspective. Gene376(2): 207–215.
34.
LewisG (2004) Tissue collection and the pharmaceutical industry: Investigating corporate biobanks. In: CorriganOTuttonR (eds) Genetic Databases: Socio-Ethical Issues in the Collection and Use of DNA. London: Routledge, 181–202.
35.
LimETWürtzPHavulinnaAet al. (2014) Distribution and medical impact of loss-of-function variants in the Finnish founder population. PLoS Genetics10(7): e1004494.
36.
LipphardtV (2010) The Jewish community of Rome: An isolated population? Sampling procedures and bio-historical narratives in genetic analysis in the 1950s. BioSocieties5(3): 306–329.
37.
MattilaL (2015) Tiedeykkönen: Mitä tapahtuu biopankeissa ja konservatiivin ja liberaalin aivoissa? Available at: http://areena.yle.fi/1-2690326 (accessed 5 November 2015).
38.
M’charekA (2005) The Human Genome Diversity Project: An Ethnography of Scientific Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
39.
Ministry of Employment and Economy (2016) Innovating together: Growth strategy for health sector research and innovation activities: The roadmap for 2016-2018. MEE guidelines and other publications 8/2016. Available at: http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-327-142-5 (accessed 15 December 2017).
Ministry of Social Affairs and Health (2015) Improving health through the use of genomic data. Finland’s genome strategy. Working Group Proposal. Available at: http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-00-3598-3 (accessed 24 January 2017).
42.
MontoyaMJ (2011) Making the Mexican Diabetic: Race, Science, and the Genetics of Inequality. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
43.
NevanlinnaHR (1972) The Finnish population structure: A genetic and genealogical study. Hereditas71: 195–236.
44.
Nordforsk (2014) Joint Nordic registers and biobanks: A goldmine for health and welfare research. Nordforsk policy paper 5. Oslo: Norden.
45.
NorioR (1966) The nephrotic syndrome and heredity. Human Heredity19(2): 113–120.
46.
NorioR (2000) Suomi-Neidon Geenit. Tautiperinnon Takana Juurillemme Johtamassa [The Finnish Maidens Genes. Finding the Roots of Our Disease Heritage]. Helsinki: Otava.
47.
NorioRNevanlinnaHRPerheentupaJ (1973) Hereditary diseases in Finland; rare flora in rare soil. Annals of Clinical Research5(3): 109–141.
48.
OngA (2016) Fungible Life: Experiment in the Asian City of Life. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
49.
PalotieA (2017) ‘Suomalaisten hankalat geenit’ Studia generalia: Olen suomalainen, Helsingin yliopisto, 16 February [The tricky genes of the Finns. Studia Generalia: ‘I am Finnish’ – Public lecture]. Available at: https://www.helsinki.fi/fi/unitube/video/94b37c41-b26f-4f09-b838-7f53522e2bd8 (accessed 10 April 2017).
50.
PalotieAPeltonen-PalotieL (2004) Pitäisikö perustaa suomalainen biopankki? Epidemiologisten aineistojen hyödyntäminen on kaikkien etu [Should a Finnish biobank be founded. Utilizing our epidemiological data is in everyone’s interest]. Duodecim120: 1710–1712.
51.
PalotieLPalotieALangeK (2000) Use of population isolates for mapping complex traits. Nature Reviews Genetics1: 182–190.
52.
PálssonG (2007) Anthropology and the New Genetics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
53.
ParryB (2004) Trading the Genome: Investigating the Commodification of Bio-Information. New York: Columbia University Press.
54.
PehkonenJViinikainenJBöckermanPet al. (2017) The challenges of GxE research: A rejoinder. Social Science & Medicine188: 204–205.
55.
PeltonenLJalankoAVariloT (1999) Molecular genetics of the Finnish disease heritage. Human Molecular Genetics8(1): 1913–1923.
56.
PitkänenK (2016) Mikä on biopankki? In: Ole osana tiedettä – Biopankkitoiminta HUS: ssa – event, Biomedicum, Helsinki, 29September [What Is a Biobank? In: ‘Be Part of Science – Biobanking at the HUS’ – Event].
57.
PrainsackB (2007) Research populations: Biobanks in Israel. New Genetics and Society26(1): 85–103.
58.
RoseH (2001) The Commodification of Bioinformation: The Icelandic Health Sector Database. London: The Wellcome Trust.
59.
RoseH (2003) The Commodification of virtual reality: The Icelandic Health Sector Database. In: GoodmanAHHeathDLindeeMS (eds) Genetic Nature/culture: Anthropology and Science beyond the Two-Culture Divide. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 77–94.
60.
SalmelaELappalainenTFranssonIet al. (2008) Genome-wide analysis of single nucleotide polymorphisms uncovers population structure in Northern Europe. PLoS ONE3(10): e3519.
61.
ShimJKDarlingKWLappeMDet al. (2014) Homogeneity and heterogeneity as situational properties: Producing – And moving beyond? Race in post-genomic science. Social Studies of Science44(4): 579–599.
SlatkinM (2008) Linkage disequilibrium: Understanding the evolutionary past and mapping the medical future. Nature Reviews Genetics9(6): 477–485.
64.
SoiniS (2013) Finland on a road towards a modern legal biobanking infrastructure. European Journal of Health Law20(3): 289–294.
65.
StitzielNOKathiresanS (2017) Leveraging human genetics to guide drug target discovery. Trends Cardiovascular Medicine27: 352–359.
66.
Sunder RajanK (2006) Biocapital: The Constitution of Postgenomic Life. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
67.
TarkkalaHHelénISnellK (2018) From health to wealth: The future of personalized medicine in the making. Futures. Epub ahead of print 11 June. DOI: 10.1016/j.futures.2018.06.004.
68.
ThompsonEESunYNicolaeDet al. (2010) Shades of gray: A comparison of linkage disequilibrium between Hutterites and Europeans. Genetic Epidemiology34(2): 133–139.
69.
TrippSGrueberM (2011) Economic Impact of the Human Genome Project. Columbus, OH: Battelle Memorial Institute.
70.
TsaiY (2010) Geneticizing ethnicity: A study on the ‘Taiwan Bio-Bank’. East Asian Science, Technology and Society4(3): 433–455.
71.
TupaselaA (2016) Genetic romanticism: Constructing the corpus in Finnish folklore and rare diseases. Configurations24(2): 121–143.
72.
TupaselaA (2017) Populations as brands in medical research: Placing genes on the global genetic atlas. BioSocieties12(1): 47–65.
73.
TupaselaAStephensN (2013) The boom and bust cycle of biobanking: Thinking through the life cycle of biobanks. Croatian Medical Journal54(5): 501–503.
74.
TupaselaATamminenS (2015) Authentic, original and valuable: Stabilizing the genetic identity in non-human and human populations in Finland. Studies in Ethnicity and Nationalism15(3): 411–431.
75.
TupaselaASnellKCañadaJ (2015) Constructing populations in biobanking. Life Sciences, Society and Policy11: 5.
76.
VariloTPeltonenL (2004) Isolates and their potential use in complex gene mapping efforts. Current Opinion in Genetics & Development14(3): 316–323.
77.
VaughtJRogersJCarolinTet al. (2011) Biobankonomics: Developing a sustainable business model approach for the formation of a human tissue biobank. Journal of the National Cancer Institute Monogram2011(42): 24–31.
78.
Ventura SantosROliveira da SilvaGGibbonS (2015) Pharmacogenomics, human genetic diversity and the incorporation and rejection of color/race in Brazil. BioSocieties10(1): 48–69.
79.
VisscherPMBrownMAMcCarthyMIet al. (2012) Five years of GWAS discovery. The American Journal of Human Genetics90(1): 7–24.
80.
WaldbyCMitchellR (2006) Tissue Economies: Blood, Organs, and Cell Lines in Late Capitalism. Durham, NC; London: Duke University Press.
81.
WangSRAgarwalaVFlannickJet al. (2014) Simulation of Finnish population history, guided by empirical genetic data, to assess power of rare-variant tests in Finland. The American Journal of Human Genetics94(5): 710–720.
82.
WeissKTerwilligerJ (2000) How many diseases does it take to map a gene with SNPs?Nature Genetics26: 151–157.
83.
ZaraI (2015) Population isolates. In: ZegginiEMorrisA (eds) Assessing Rare Variation in Complex Traits: Design and Analysis of Genetic Studies. New York: Springer, 107–122.
