1. ANDES Communiqué – May 2011
Genographic Project
Hunts the Last Incas
Resurrected ‘Vampire Project’ Brings
Fears of Biopiracy to Cusco Region
“The Q’ero Nation knows that its history, its past
present, and future, is our Inca culture, and we don’t
need research called genetics to know who we are.
We are Incas, always have been and always will be.”
– Letter from the Hatun Q’eros Community
30 April 2011
Summary
In early April, Asociación ANDES received word globalization is under intensifying pressure as
that seven researchers from the Genographic highways carve their way into Q’ero territory,
Project will arrive in Peru in the first week of bringing potentially exploitative tourism
May to collect human DNA samples from the initiatives and attracting the interest of mining
Q’eros people. This information is not widely companies and bioprospectors – like the
known in the Cusco Region because the US- researchers from the Genographic Project.
based Genographic Project did not approach
local or regional authorities about their plan, The Q’eros were not consulted beforehand
rather, the Project hired a local tour guide and about the DNA collection which, they have been
sent a cursory one page notification of their informed, will take place following a
upcoming visit to people in a Q’ero town. presentation on May 7th (2011). The
Genographic Project has urged the Q’ero to
The Q’eros are an isolated indigenous group bring children and elders to the DNA collection
who live in a rural province of the Cusco and, in true neo-colonial style, promises a “fun”
Region.1 They are renowned for their shamanic presentation with “pretty pictures” to induce
knowledge and self-proclaimed identity as ‘The attendees to offer DNA samples.2
Last Incas.’ The Q’eros inhabit a diverse territory
that many would consider inaccessible, and The Genographic Project’s plan presents a
they have maintained cultural traditions from challenge to Cusco Region, which is known for
pre-Hispanic times. The Q’eros’ decision to efforts to protect its genetic patrimony and for
purposefully maintain their identity and taking a cautious approach to biotechnology. It
traditions despite the increasing reach of has declared itself a GMO-free region has
1 2
Peru’s largest political subdivisions are Regions, which are Letter to persons in Qocha Moqo, Peru concerning Genographic
subdivided into Provinces, which are in turn composed of Districts. Project. 7 April, 2011.
Cusco Region is one of 25 regions in Peru. http://64.22.85.140/~communiq/pdf/Carta_a_Qeros.pdf
1

2. adopted a biopiracy ordinance to regulate researchers at 14 other universities, institutes
bioprospecting. Cusco’s ordinances have clear and a DNA sequencing company. The Project
requirements for bioprospecting collection of planned to end DNA collections in 2010, but it
genetic materials,3 including human DNA, as do still collecting indigenous peoples’ DNA for
applicable international conventions, national reasons that have yet to be publicly explained.
law, and local customary law. These appear to
have been largely ignored. The Genographic Project was constructed and is
steered by architects of the Human Genome
The Q’ero have decided to resist the Diversity Project (HGDP) and their protégés. It is
Genographic Project’s incursion. On 30 April, an uncomfortable heritage. In the 1990s, the
following a community assembly, the Q’ero HGDP’s plan to collect blood from indigenous
wrote the President of the Cusco Region asking people proved so controversial that it earned
that the government ensure that the the popular name ‘The Vampire Project.’
Genographic Project does not violate Q’ero
rights and complies with law. The Q’eros In 1997, the HGDP was effectively terminated
emphasized that the Project did not have its when its efforts to obtain US government
consent for DNA collections and that Project funding were rejected due to ethical
researchers are not welcome in Q’ero territory. shortcomings.4 The Genographic Project claims
to have solved some of the HGDP’s problems;
Many in Cusco will view the Genographic but its own transparency is lacking. Because it is
Project’s plans as unethical and exploitative. privately funded, there are few requirements
The Project’s human bioprospecting has for public disclosure of its activities, and
obvious problems with disclosure and informed oversight by government and civil society
consent, incurs risks of theft of genetic material organizations is highly curtailed.
(and data) and genetic discrimination, and
arrogantly purports to inform indigenous To obtain DNA, the Genographic Project collects
people, whose self-identity is not in question, swabs of cheek tissue (which it emphasizes)
who they “really” are. And in the false promise and blood samples (not publicly emphasized).
of the latter, it may cause averse legal The Project says that it will not create self-
consequences to its research subjects. replicating “immortal” cell lines from blood
samples, as the HGDP proposed, but that
doesn’t mean that the samples are not
Background: The Genographic Project “immortal” in other senses. The samples and
sequence data an be indefinitely preserved, and
The Genographic Project is a large scale genetic
DNA of interest duplicated.
study that seeks to collect DNA samples of
hundreds of thousands of people from around While the Project has identified some things
the world, particularly indigenous people. By that it will not do with the samples (e.g. create
sequencing and comparing the DNA samples, cell lines), it has not clearly identified the future
the Project purports to be able to map human genetic studies that it plans, and the relatively
migration over history, one of many purposes
few Genographic Project studies published to
to which the DNA samples may be put to use.
date have focused on scientifically “low
The computing giant IMB is the principle
hanging fruit” (i.e. relatively obvious topics and
corporate sponsor of the Project. Key Project
methods). Mainly, these studies have
scientists are employed by the US National
compared variations in Y chromosomes (the
Geographic Society. Members of the Project’s
“Genographic Consortium” also include
4
US National Academies of Science 1997. Evaluating Human
3
Government of Cusco Region. Ordenanza Regional 048 - 2008 Genetic Diversity. Commission on Life Sciences. URL:
CR/GRC.CUSCO contra la biopiratería http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=5955
2

3. male chromosome) and in maternally inherited number of perspectives. In the present case,
mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA). Q’ero self-identity is strong, vibrant, and well-
One of the activities that the Project says that it recognized. The Genographic Project, however,
will not conduct is medical research, but this claims that it will tell the Q’eros scientific truths
does not mean that its research may not have about who they are that the Q’eros do not
medical implications. The genetic markers it already know. Among them: If and how the
chooses to use may or may not be linked to Q’eros are related to the Incas (as if Inca is
disease predispositions, but either way, now or defined genetically), related to the Aymara (a
in the future such implications may become neighbouring indigenous linguistic group), or to
apparent. Even though the Y chromosome and “people from the jungle” (i.e. Amazonian
mtDNA together constitute a very small peoples).
proportion of the human genome, various
conditions have been linked to mutations on Historical claims by molecular biologists
them. For example, forms of male infertility, sometimes overreach their field of competence
deafness, and diabetes are linked to specific and what can ultimately be concluded through
sequences on the Y chromosome, and an even science and the historical record. They are
greater number of medical conditions is linked influenced by and reliant on assumptions about
to mtDNA mutations. genetically “isolated” or “inbred” populations
that discount historical fluidity of cultures and
Of course, mtDNA and the Y chromosome are previous intermarriage. Evidence of these
the topic of current studies, and are not the shortcomings in attempting to explain human
only research that will be conducted. The history in the Americas can be found in the
samples contain the full complement of each genetic claims and counterclaims published in
participants DNA, and it may be expected that the last two decades about possible ancient
future studies (or current unpublished studies) exchanges between South America, Polynesia,
will expand into analysis of other areas of the Asia, and Melanesia as well as varying theories
genome. The Genographic Project is notably about migrations from Asia to Alaska (and
uninformative about where, for what purposes, thence the rest of the Americas).
and under whose control it will store DNA
samples and data for such future uses. Now, thanks to the Genographic Project, the
Q’eros could become genetic pawns in new
Genetic predispositions and medical theories academic debate over what constitutes an Inca.
about them are constantly being identified and While a genetic search for a “real” Inca might
modified. Thus, even if Genographic Project make for National Geographic TV programming,
research that is not explicitly linked to medical it’s unlikely to yield a defensible result or be
conditions today, it may become so in the helpful for the Q’eros and other indigenous
future. When sequences are linked to specific peoples. For the Genographic Project’s
indigenous communities there may be direct professors, who have no significant personal
social and medical consequences. These are not investment in the Q’ero community, the stakes
so keenly felt in a large population where are comparatively low – they relate to academic
bearers of a particular trait may be dispersed in publications and scientific prestige. For the
ways that are relatively unpredictable. Q’eros, alleged molecular “proof” or “disproof”
of their heritage as the “Last Incas” could have
profound and unanticipated social and legal
Genetic “Truth” and Consequences consequences.
The validity of the genetic results of the Complicating matters is some scientists disdain
Genographic Project, as applied to human
for indigenous peoples origin stories, and pieces
history and cultures, are debateable from a of the historical record that don’t fit the
3

4. contemporary genetic theory. The head of the studies with clear commercial and medical
Genographic Project in Peru, Ricardo Fujita implications.7 For example, a 2002 study by
Alarcón, a US-trained molecular biologist, Fujita asserted that 60% of the indigenous
reflected this attitude in a 2004 paper on his residents of the Peruvian Lake Titicaca islands
genetic studies of indigenous people from the of Anapia and Suana8 have a “defective” gene
Lake Titicaca region. Fujita claims, “The origin of that “predisposes them to infectious diseases
many contemporary native communities is such as tuberculosis and HIV, and to autoimmune
unknown, of them we only have theories based diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis and lupus,
on oral traditions or rolls taken by Spanish among others.” According to the study, the
conquistadors beginning in the 16th Century.”5 gene was found at the highest frequency ever
We, however, have yet to meet any indigenous documented in the Peruvian islanders.9
people who don’t know who they are and
where they come from. It seems then that Fujita Five years later, in 2007, Fujita and Genographic
doesn’t have a great deal of respect for Project researchers returned to Lake Titicaca to
indigenous peoples own stories. collect DNA samples from other islanders.10 It is
not known if the 2007 Lake Titicaca DNA donors
were made aware of Fujita’s publication history.
Culture Clash and Confused Purposes Publication of detailed genetic information on
small communities impacts personal privacy and
In Andean Peru, the clash of cultures between could contribute to social prejudice or
the Genographic Project and its human research discrimination in medical care, insurance, or
subjects is much deeper than divergent
employment. No results of the 2007 collections
historical narratives. The leader of the
have thus far been made available.
Genographic Project in Peru not only believes
that biotechnology will determine the identity
of indigenous peoples, but that it also should be
The Limits of Promises
a motor of economic development. For
example, while the Region has declared itself While the Project prohibits commercial
GMO-free, Genographic’s Fujita disagrees, and exploitation per se of DNA and data by
has appeared on television to promote members of the Genographic Consortium,
agricultural biotechnology, in particular an potentially harmful publications such as the
alpaca genetics project that he leads.6 With Anapia study arguably do not constitute
Cusco’s proud agrocentric culture, such views commercial use. Nor would it seem that the
fuel suspicions of the Genographic Project. Genographic Project has any ability to prevent
others from commercially exploiting the
Although the Genographic Project professes to sequence and diversity data that it publishes.
have no commercial or medical intent, its Finally, the future disposition of the samples it
representatives in Peru are active in biomedical collects is not well-defined and it is unclear if
and pharmacology research related to
indigenous peoples. Fujita’s research center, in 7
See URL:
the capitol Lima, is pursuing pharmacogenomic, http://www.medicina.usmp.edu.pe/Academico/Investigacion/genet
human “disease gene”, and medicinal plant ica.php
8
Anapia and Suana are both small, rural islands located in southern
Lake Titicaca, east of the Bolivian city of Copacabana. The 2005
5
Sandoval J et al. 2004. Variantes del ADNmt en isleños del lago Peruvian census recorded 2,400 people on the five islands of the
Titicaca: máxima frecuencia del haplotipo B1 y evidencia de efecto Anapia district, an area characterized by very strong indigenous
fundador. Rev. peru. biol. 11(2): 161-168. identity and tradition.
6 9
Interview on Potential Benefits of Transgenic Crops to Local Sandoval J et al 2002. Alta frecuencia de un haplotipo susceptible
Agriculture and the Future Impact of Modern Biotechnology on the del gen Mannose Binding Lectin, en las islas Anapia-Suana del Lago
Peruvian Economy. Channel 21. Cusco, Peru. 2007. URL: Titicaca. Horizonte Medico (Peru). Vol. 2, Nº 1-2. December.
10
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-zELGVo1FA and Proyectos del Genographic Project 2011. Fabricio R. Santos (web page). URL:
Centro de Genética y Biología Molecular, Canal N. Lima, Peru. 2010. https://genographic.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/pi/santos
URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UtNqQEaKBig. _notes.html (accessed 14 April 2011).
4

5. the Genographic Project has the ability and will The researchers at each of the regional
to bind future recipients to its terms, or to centers around the world work first with
monitor and prevent hijacking of its samples collaborators and leaders in individual
and data. communities not just to explain the
Genographic Project, but also to better
Hijacking DNA samples collected for one understand how and if those communities
purpose and applying them to another has been are interested in learning about their
a repeated problem with studies on indigenous migratory history, before any other
peoples’ DNA. A long history of such cases planning takes place. Sampling of DNA
exists, and doubtless many more remain to be takes place only when consultation—which
documented. In a noted case, the Havasupai may take weeks and months—is complete
Tribe in the United States challenged and there is both collective and individual
researchers from Arizona State University, interest in participating.
banishing them from tribal lands and suing
them in court. The reason: The researchers, Yet the approach to the Q’eros has been
who collected blood for diabetes research, nothing of the sort. The Q’eros were sent a one
performed a variety of other studies with them page letter that presents the Project and its
unbeknownst to the Havasupai. These included goals in a single paragraph. DNA is defined as “a
published research identifying the Havasupai’s chemical that all of us have in our bodies that
ancestors as Asian, in conflict with the shows our origins and family connections from
Havasupai’s own origin stories.11 centuries ago”, as if its purpose is historical
genetics. Then, the letter continues (emphasis
in the original):
Q’eros 2011: Informed Consent Issues The 7th of May I’ll arrive with 7 people from
The Q’eros have now been thrust into the National Geographic, from the US and Lima,
middle of the Genographic Project and have to give you a presentation on the study at
little time to determine a course of action. The the Qocha Moqo school. We’re going to use
planned collection of Q’ero DNA is scheduled to a projector and pretty pictures! Please,
take place in the community of Qocha Moqo on invite everybody from Qocha Moqo (adults,
7 May 2011, even if serious questions about the elders, children) to participate, because the
legality, ownership, disposition, and profitability presentation is going to be very interesting!
of the genetic materials remain open. Everything is voluntary, there’s no
obligation, but you’re going to have fun and
Those questions certainly are not addressed by learn a lot!
the Genographic Project’s invitation to the If you want, you can participate in the study.
Q’eros to give DNA samples, whose casual tone The benefit is that the people of Q’eros can
and threadbare content is at strong odds with know their ancestral roots, that is, know if
the detailed procedures that the Genographic they are related to the Incas, Aymara, or
Project claims to conduct. The Project states people in the jungle. You can learn about
that participants grant informed consent that is your origin from centuries and centuries ago.
deliberate, considered, individual and collective.
According to the Project:12 We’re going to explain well on the 7th of
May, so if you don’t understand now, come
11
that day and we’ll explain.
See Harmon A 2010. Indian Tribe Wins Fight to Limit Research of
Its DNA. New York Times. 22 April. URL:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/22/us/22dna.html On the basis of that presentation, the Q’ero will
12
Genographic Project 2011. Frequently Asked Questions (web be asked to consent to DNA collection. While
page). URL:
https://genographic.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/lan/en/fa
the letter makes clear that participation is
qs_about.html (accessed 26 April 2011).
5

6. voluntary, the consent process it describes “collectivity” appears to be that proportion of
cannot be remotely reconciled with what the the people from a single settlement that care to
Genographic Project says are its procedures: attend the Project’s presentation.
• The Genographic Project claims that it • The explanation of what the Genographic
conducts a consultation process “before any Project is, and attendant ethical and legal
other planning takes place”, but this collection issues, is glib and undetailed. Even if it is
was planned down to date, exact location, and elaborated upon at the Project’s presentation,
time of day before the Q’eros were contacted. the Q’ero would have no opportunity to consult
alternative sources of information before being
• The Genographic Project says that its asked to donate DNA. This flies in the face of
consultation process is lengthy and detailed, the Project’s claim that prior informed consent
and “may take weeks and months”. For the is considered and deliberate.
Q’eros, however, Genographic plans a single
powerpoint presentation immediately before • There is no indication that the Genographic
collecting DNA. This “fun” presentation with Project has obtained legal permission to
“pretty pictures” manages to invoke the sordid conduct the collections, another practice the
legacy of religious prosthelytizing with mirrors Project claims to follow.
and trinkets, although the Bible has now been
replaced by a DNA sequencer as the ultimate Analysis of Q’ero genetic material, meant to
font of truth. determine migration patterns, could impact the
interests and aspirations of the Q’eros and
• The Genographic Project claims that it other indigenous nations, in particular
determines that communities are “interested in perceptions of their historical identity and
learning about their migratory history” (or, at contemporary affiliation with traditional
least, the version of it that Genographic offers). ‘homelands.’ The Genographic Project’s findings
Yet there is no such determination here. have potential to become arguments to vacate
Instead, the Q’ero are presumed to be legal title to territory, erode cultural cohesion
interested in what genetics has to offer, which and inflame state-community conflicts over land
is presented as objective truth rather than and natural wealth. Resource extractive
evolving science. Access to this information is industries, for example, have a pressing interest
used as an inducement to participate (a in invalidating land claims, cultural practice and
“benefit”). identity that are perpetuated through national
memory, and livelihoods are that rooted in
• The Genographic Project claims to be traditional knowledge, which may conflict with
interested in indigenous perspectives on the activities such as commercial mining.
Project, yet it expresses no interest in the
Q’eros perspective, nor could they effectively
shape the Project design as the Q’eros’ only The Genographic Project Study of the
opportunity to express them is at the time of Seaconke Wampanoag Tribe
DNA collection.
The only publication to date by the Genographic
• The Genographic Project claims to seek Project that is focused on an indigenous people
collective consent, but there is no apparent in the Americas is a case in point as to why the
effort to do so here. It would be physically Q’eros have reason to be concerned. The 2010
impossible for the Q’ero of Qocha Moqo to study is on the Seaconke Wampanoag people of
consult with other Q’ero communities in the the northeastern United States, and it appears
time allowed to contemplate the Genographic to significantly damage their attempt to gain
Project’s proposition. In this case, the legal recognition.
6

7. Although the study includes Wampanoag co- make a decision.17 Lack of recognition means
authors, and it recounts their history in unusual the US government does not acknowledge
detail for such a publication, what matters in a Seaconke Wampanoag sovereignty.18
genetics publication is genetics. And the
conclusion is inescapable: “our study did not
find any maternal Native American lineages in the Implications for the Q'eros, Indigenous Peoples
Seaconke Wampanoag tribe”. 13 What that in Peru, and Around the World
means is that the Genographic Project claims
that Seaconke Wampanoag women are recent Like many indigenous communities, the Q’eros
arrivals from Europe and Africa and are not and their agroecological knowledge and
“genetic” Native Americans. traditional livelihoods are already seriously
threatened by biopiracy and extractive
Seaconke Wampanoag men fared little better. industries. The Q’eros are presently in the
The Genographic Project claims that they are a crosshairs of the Genographic Project, but they
mix of Native American, European, African, and are far from the only indigenous people to face
Melanesian. It adds that none of the “Native it. Most of the issues facing the Q’ero are
manifestations of larger problems raised by the
American DNA” it found could be conclusively
linked to the historical indigenous inhabitants of Genographic Project that effect not only other
the US northeast.14 indigenous peoples from whom the Project is
taking DNA samples, but all indigenous peoples
whose traditions and identities are challenged
In short, if the Seaconke Wampanoag were
by Western genetic science and the economic
looking to the Genographic Project for support
and belief systems associated with it. Some of
of their appeal for recognition by the US
these legal, ethical, economic, and cultural
government, as has been reported,15 the study
issues are summarized below:
was an unmitigated disaster for the tribe. Will
this paper will be presented to the Q’eros?
Political/Legal: By visiting Indigenous
communities in Cusco and collecting DNA
Whether or not one is confident in the
without contacting the regional government,
Genographic Project’s result, or believe that it is
the Genographic Project will violate Cusco’s
culturally significant even if it were empirically
sovereignty and standing ordinance on
correct,16 the Seaconke Wampanoag’s attempts
bioprospecting.19 As agents of a foreign entity,
to gain recognition by the US government have
Project researchers should make their
been dealt a setback. The genetics results can
intentions fully known beforehand to governing
be interpreted as adverse evidence with respect
bodies – state, regional, and Indigenous – and
to several criteria used by the government to
acquire appropriate approvals.
13
Zhadanov SI et al 2010. Genetic heritage and native identity of
the Seaconke Wampanoag tribe of Massachusetts. Am J Phys The Project’s ambiguity about storage of
Anthropol. 2010 Aug;142(4):579-89.
14
samples and data raises more legal questions,
In other words, the Genographic Project claims, even the
proportion of Seaconke Wampanoag men with ‘Native American’ Y
including human rights. The consent procedures
chromosome DNA may be recent migrants from other areas of that the Genographic Project says it has
North America, meaning that the DNA may not represent a genetic adopted have been have flagrantly disregarded
artifact of Seaconke Wampanoag identity.
15
See TallBear K 2007. Narratives of Race and Indigeneity in the
Genographic Project. Journal of Law, Medicine, and Ethics 35:3,
17
citing press accounts. Also well-worth reading for its other discusion US Code of Federal Regulations, 25 CFR 83. Procedures for
on the Genographic Project. Establishing that an American Indian Group Exists as an Indian Tribe.
16 18
The Wampanoag are widely known to have intermarried with For interesting further commentary on this article see: TallBear K
other people for many generations, a fact that does not inherently 2010. Genographic and the Seaconke Wampanoag (web page).
dilute their indigenous identity, and which the authors point out. URL: http://www.kimtallbear.com/1/post/2010/10/genographic-
Cast in the mode of thinking of molecular biology, however, genetic and-the-seaconke-wampanoag.html
19
evidence of this already known fact can easily construed to Ordenanza Regional 048 - 2008 CR/GRC. CUSCO contra la
undermine their legal claims. biopiratería.
7

8. in the Q’eros case and do not appear to satisfy Peru. In reality, informed consent may be
applicable law. Further, in the future, with impossible without specialized training in
stored samples, can informed consent be genetics and medicine, without which it is
obtained for future procedures or technologies difficult to evaluate the claims of the scientists.
that do not yet exist? Granted that the
Genographic Project states that participants The Genographic Project’s communication with
may withdraw at any time, but will they be the Q’eros characterizes the DNA collection as a
aware of the future location and use of these “fun” social event that every man, woman, and
samples? child should attend. It skirts the serious issues
inherent in human genetic research, suggesting
Article 31 of the UN Declaration on the Rights of that the Project holds only rewards for the
Indigenous People declares that “Indigenous Q’eros, and not risks. This tactic renders a
peoples have the right to maintain, control, balanced consideration of participation
protect and develop their cultural heritage, impossible. Rather than discuss risks, the
traditional knowledge and traditional cultural Genographic Project suggests it may genetically
expressions”. By collecting indigenous peoples trace Q’eros ancestry to the Incas. These
DNA, storing it for future research under non- promises are speculative and obscure both risk
indigenous control, and purporting to and scientific uncertainty.21
determine cultural heritage by genetics, does
the Genographic Project not seek, by design, to Economic: The Genographic Project’s scientists
usurp the rights of indigenous people? To say may conclude that indigenous peoples are not
nothing of the other potential legal abuses that descended from the original inhabitants of their
could result from neglect or deliberate act by territories, but migrants from other lands. This
the Project, such as disenfranchisement and is not a hypothetical concern, as demonstrated
discrimination? by the Genographic Project’s study of the
Wampanoag. There is a related risk in some
Ethical: The Genographic Project was never regions that the Project could ‘discover’ that
intended to serve the needs or interest of Indigenous groups are not genetically ‘pure,’
Indigenous Peoples, but to satisfy the curiosity but instead are ‘admixed’ with European or
of Western scientists. Indigenous Peoples were other ancestry. Such findings have potential to
not consulted about the Project when it was in endanger territorial claims and legal
the planning stages. The Project created a code recognitions. And in an even crueller twist of
of ethics for itself and by itself, a dubious fate, depending upon where in the genome the
strategy in any circumstance, evidenced by the Project looks for its evidence, or upon future
fact that it is violating its own published research, these ‘discoveries’ are subject to
procedures in its approach to the Q’eros. revision.
Because of its use of living people as the Such discussions about the significance of
subjects of scientific research designed to genetic evidence for migration or intermarriage
answer academic questions and lack of intent to may suit comfortably ensconced professors’
provide Indigenous participants with any academic purposes just fine; but it is unjust to
tangible benefit, the initiative is exploitative.
The collection of samples was halted in Alaska, 21
Another ethical aspect that merits its own analysis is the
for example, because consent forms were Genographic Project’s Legacy Fund, which makes small donations to
improperly explained to the local community,20 cultural preservation projects. The lack of relevant links between
and ethical problems are again surfacing in the DNA research at hand and Indigenous Peoples’ cultural
continuity is troubling. Without stronger justification, the Legacy
Fund cannot cogently counter accusations that its function is to
deflect attention from predatory elements of the research, making it
20
Harmon A 2006. DNA Gatherers Hit Snag: Tribes Don’t Trust essentially a ‘whitewashing’ effort, or an attempt to simply buy
Them. New York Times. 10 December. Indigenous participation.
8

9. subject the territorial claims and self-identities confusing what is flashy with what is valid and
of Indigenous human cultures to their young meaningful. This clash of scientific findings and
and evolving science, particularly when it traditional knowledge of tribal history
purports to provide objective truth. If happened in the case of the Havasupai.
Indigenous territorial claims are so threatened,
this opens the door for transnational actors – By virtue of their conscious cultural and
particularly corporations, which already operate geographic separation, the Q’eros are especially
with too few legal and ethical constraints – to vulnerable to Western modes of organizing of
move in and begin extracting the natural culture and knowledge, wherein the local and
resource wealth of the region. customary must give way to the (Euro-)modern.
Certain cultural expressions of the Q’eros are
Mining interests are already poised to stake a particularly vulnerable to the aggressive
claim in Q’ero territory, while similar corporate promotion of alien hierarchies. Their status as
ambitions have surfaced all across Peru. If shamans, for example, whose knowledge is
scientists announce that, in their opinion, the almost by definition set in opposition to (and
Q’eros are not Indigenous to the region, their ranked below) scientific understandings of
hold on their territory is rendered more natural and human phenomena.
precarious, and may be weighed against
competing interests in the land and the material More broadly, the Q’eros view of themselves
wealth found therein. A logical extension of and of history, as well as the view of the nation
’non-Indigenous’ status would also hold that, taken by outsiders, may be substantially altered
since they are not originally from Qocha Moqo, by the planned research. Self-definition and
any other geographical location should suit the self-determination (recognized and protected
Q’eros equally well, in which case relocation of by the International Labour Organization’s
this community becomes a possibility. Convention No.169, among other legal
instruments) may be overridden by scientific
Socio-cultural: It is misleading to assert that hypotheses of origin and migration, and
genetic research exists independently of public political opinions about the resulting legal and
perceptions of groups, or that scientific ethical claims.
assertions are a neutral or benign parallel
narrative to indigenous cultures’ own Other Considerations: Even if the Genographic
knowledge. Scientists have their own ideas Project was otherwise commendable, random
about Indigenous cultures, which often conflict samples that test for very narrow markers
with local knowledge and can be damaging to cannot provide reliable or more widely useful
that knowledge. The Project acknowledges information, and these results will probably
that the narratives can be different; but not that raise as many questions as they answer. It is
its own can be damaging. Science and history therefore wise to ask whether this research is
are not the same in Western and indigenous really even productive in the service of Western
cultures, and when they are in opposition the knowledge, or whether it will actually produce
Western model is usually been taken as the greatest benefits for its ‘parent’ companies
‘truthful’ while Indigenous knowledge is (The National Geographic Society and IBM) and
labelled ‘superstition’ and ‘myth,’ despite the the reputations of the researchers involved.
inherently provisional nature of scientific
‘evidence.’ Concerns about hidden agendas arise not only
from the huge financial interest in
Even within the most traditional communities, bioinformatics of project sponsor IBM but in
because what is Western is often seen as Peru specifically from the fact that the in-
‘modern’ or ‘cosmopolitan,’ it easily captures country director of the Genographic Project is
the attention (particularly of youth) based on both an advocate of agricultural biotechnology
9

10. and performs biomedical genetic studies on precedents for any similar research
indigenous people – both things that the undertakings that may follow in its wake.
Genographic Project states that it is not
involved in. This has special relevance for To begin this process, Asociación ANDES and
agrocentric cultures, such as the Quechua; the Indigenous communities of the Cusco
regions that have banned genetically-modified region of Peru call on representatives of the
organisms, such as Cusco; and delicate, Genographic Project to respect the Q’eros
megadiverse ecosystems that house the centre decision not to participate in their project, and
of origin of key food crops, such as the Andes. to attend a public forum in order to answer
questions and concerns about their research,
both undertaken and planned. Further, this
Recommendations dialogue should be followed up by bringing all
articulated concerns, along with the results of
The extent and seriousness of the concerns
the public forum, to the global community, via
about the Genographic Project call for an
the United Nations.
immediate halt to, and review of its research
activity. Indigenous peoples’ communities,
Ultimately, we assert that the minimum
nations, and organizations; institutions of local,
acceptable standard for continuation for the
regional, state, and global governance; and Genographic Project is that Indigenous Peoples
human rights, social justice, and development participate fully in every facet of the research,
agencies must ally in support of a thorough, including wielding veto power over any aspect
formal, transparent, and independent
of the Project.
investigation into the mandate and activities of
the Genographic Project, and set firm
Published in May 2011 by
Asociación ANDES
Ruinas 451
Cusco PERU
Tel: +51 84 245021
Fax: +51 84 245021
communique@andes.org.pe
http://www.andes.org.pe
10