Upon listening to Dr. Makarious as well as reading “Tackling a Disease on a Global Scale: The Global Parkinson’s Genetics Program (GP2)” (Blauwendraat et al., 2025), I was impressed by how it redefines what global research can be. Instead of focusing solely on clinical trials or European data, GP2 builds a truly international network, including 275 research groups in over 60 countries, in order to uncover the genetic roots of Parkinson’s disease. GP2 argues that scientific progress and global equity are inseparable, and that if genetic research only represents part of the world, then the therapies built on that data will only serve part of the world instead of being more inclusive.
That idea resonated even more when I read an article titled “Genomic Databases Need More Diversity” from the University of Maryland School of Medicine (2024). The article introduces the Genetics of Latin American Diversity Database (GLADdb), which gathers genomic data from more than 54,000 individuals across 46 regions in Latin America. Its goal is to correct the bias in genetic databases that reflect European ancestry. Researchers behind GLADdb point out that the term “Latinx” has often been treated as one single genetic category, when in reality Latin America contains much more ancestral variation, such as Indigenous, African, European, and Asian lineages. Without recognizing that complexity, global genomics is essentially reinforcing inequity rather than reducing it.
Both projects GP2 and GLADdb share the same core goal, to make biomedical research reflect the diversity of the human population. In the case of Parkinson’s, GP2 highlights how much of what we really ‘know’ about the disease is limited by who has been studied. Most genome studies have focused on Northern European populations, leaving gaps in our understanding ofParkinson’s in African, Asian, or Latin American individuals. GP2’s network aims to close this gap by generating and analyzing data from underrepresented regions.
This is so much more than just an ethical solution, it’s a scientific necessity. Genetic risk factors don’t simply distribute equally across populations. For example, certain LRRK2 and GBA1 variants linked to Parkinson’s are more prevalent in specific ancestries, meaning that therapies based on those findings could fail if applied to specific or different genetic groups. Similarly, the GLADdb project found new patterns of gene variation that were invisible in Eurocentric datasets, potentially changing how risk scores are calculated for conditions ranging from diabetes to neurodegeneration (University of Maryland School of Medicine, 2024). Yet both efforts also face the same challenge, that being how to make global collaboration fair. Reading about GP2 and GLADdb side by side, I’m reminded that ‘diversity’ in science is very necessary and should not be neglected, it’s a way to make research more accurate, innovative, and humane. Neuroscience in particular needs this shift, because diseases like Parkinson’s are both biological and social, meaning they are shaped by genes, environment, and access to care. If we want treatments that truly work for everyone, our science has to represent everyone too.
References:
Blauwendraat, C., Noyce, A. J., Mata, I. F., et al. (2025). Tackling a disease on a global scale, the Global Parkinson’s Genetics Program, GP2: A new generation of opportunities. The American Journal of Human Genetics, 112(9), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajhg.2025.07.014
University of Maryland School of Medicine. (2024, November). Genomic databases need more diversity. https://www.medschool.umaryland.edu/news/2024/genomic-databases-need-more-diversity.html
No comments:
Post a Comment