We all know that there are genetic 'markers', that we can often use to tell what continent folks are from. However, these markers are nearly always junk DNA or in other cases, trivially small sequences of codons. Junk DNA is DNA that codes for nothing, and is there as a result of evolution and billions of years of viral activity (and yes, has its uses for future generations!). In some other cases the shared ancestral sequence is maybe a dozen or two nucleotides long.

People like Lee and SDAI make a lot about the existence of markers- but the important thing to understand is that markers do not point to different genetic bases (deep ancestry born through isolation and sub-speciation), but rather to shared recent ancestry. Lee and SDAI are not after the best answers, but are after their own answers. Answers that conform to their own worldview.

In other words, markers point to shallow differences borne of recent assults (viruses) or random recent events that happened to a group within a given area that have not evened out yet by diffusion.

There simply are no proper subspecies in the human race. Humans, as a group are remarkably homogeneous. We are a young species (100,000 years maybe? compared to most other species on earth, we just hatched!) with incredibly long legs. There have been waves of recent and historic migration into nearly every continent on earth. A human 'subspecies' is surely possible, but not until we shut up and stay still for a few 10s of thousands of years.

And subspecies is what you would really need for there to be enough genetic differences to target a virus or (even more so) a bacteria.

As Tom points out- no virus yet known is human 'race specific', and there are more breeds of human-habitating viruses out there then there are human beings in north america (and probably the world). And they can propagate generation to generation to generation in minutes! Don't you think they would have figured it out by now?

Resistance to a particular disease (malaria) found more often in one group then another is usually the result of (often deleterious) gross mutations (like Sickle Cell). But yet again, the Sickle Cell allele has more to do with who your immediate ancestors are, than your 'race'. There are many folks with sickle cell that look pretty damn caucasoid! And the Hemophilia mutation is found in plenty of other groups.

Even more, one of the most interesting resistances, a resistance to the HIV virus, has been found in African and Caucasian 'racial' groups. The exact same mutation in two so-called 'races'.

I am afraid, Bro, that you have read too much SciFi. This is a common plot theme going back to the 1950's. It makes for better fiction than reality.

Race, in fact, is merely defined by subjective looks than any scientific reality. Humans are really good at spotting people who look different than they themselves do, but the differences are trivial compared to sayt, the physiological differences between breeds of Dogs (and even there, there is not subspeciation).

Davin L.