Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a carrier of the trait, as was my mom. My mom told me I was negative so I was totally surprised when I came up positive during my pregnancy labs. This is not a big deal and not worth you getting an amniocentesis over. Your child has a 50 percent chance of being a carrier. One of my kids is, the other isn't. We need to stay well hydrated and listen to our bodies, that is all. Please calm down. And not only black people can have it. This is misinformation.

Not everyone that has sickle cell trait is black, but everyone that has sickle cell trait has a black ancestor. They traced the origin of the gene back to one child that lived in Africa 7,300 years ago.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-43373247

https://www.the-independent.com/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/hidden-black-ancestry-linked-to-rise-in-sickle-cell-blood-disorder-738008.html

This is true. This is how there are people that physically appear to be fully European that have sickle cell trait or disease. The African ancestry decreases with each generation, but the sickle cell allele can keep getting passed down. The ancestry won't always show up on an ancestry DNA test either because those tests only go back 6-8 generations. I was taught that we are to screen every patient regardless of what they self-report their background as or what they physically appear to be for this exact reason. Not every medical professional is aware of this or follows this protocol though.

This, this, this. I tested positive for sickle cell trait (not the disease). I took an ancestry test, and it said 2.7% Sub-Saharan African. I look fully European (obviously).

Theoretically, this can and does happen with traits from any type of ancestry. Here's a hypothetical scenario. Imagine an East Asian and a European person have a child together. The Asian parent has brown eyes (2 alleles for brown eyes - homozygous). The White/European parent has blue eyes (2 alleles for blue eyes - homozygous). Their child together will automatically have one allele for brown eyes and one allele for blue eyes (heterozygous). Imagine that biracial child marries a fully East Asian person who has brown eyes. Their child(ren) will be roughly 75% Asian but could carry one allele for blue eyes (if it gets passed down from the biracial parent). If the future generations continue to marry fully Asian people, the allele for blue eyes could continue to get passed down even when the European ancestry has become such a small percentage. Eventually you will end up with a fully Asian person that carries the gene for blue eyes (as long as that allele continues to be inherited). This is how new traits and genes are introduced into populations that they didn't originate in.

Genetics are way more intricate than the average person thinks. Our DNA comes from many generations of people that existed prior to us and our parents AKA ancestors. A "genetic throwback" is really just a recessive trait that has been masked for generations (by a dominant trait) but suddenly appears again when two people who unknowingly both carry that recessive allele have a child together.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a carrier of the trait, as was my mom. My mom told me I was negative so I was totally surprised when I came up positive during my pregnancy labs. This is not a big deal and not worth you getting an amniocentesis over. Your child has a 50 percent chance of being a carrier. One of my kids is, the other isn't. We need to stay well hydrated and listen to our bodies, that is all. Please calm down. And not only black people can have it. This is misinformation.

Not everyone that has sickle cell trait is black, but everyone that has sickle cell trait has a black ancestor. They traced the origin of the gene back to one child that lived in Africa 7,300 years ago.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-43373247

https://www.the-independent.com/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/hidden-black-ancestry-linked-to-rise-in-sickle-cell-blood-disorder-738008.html

This is true. This is how there are people that physically appear to be fully European that have sickle cell trait or disease. The African ancestry decreases with each generation, but the sickle cell allele can keep getting passed down. The ancestry won't always show up on an ancestry DNA test either because those tests only go back 6-8 generations. I was taught that we are to screen every patient regardless of what they self-report their background as or what they physically appear to be for this exact reason. Not every medical professional is aware of this or follows this protocol though.

This, this, this. I tested positive for sickle cell trait (not the disease). I took an ancestry test, and it said 2.7% Sub-Saharan African. I look fully European (obviously).

Theoretically, this can and does happen with traits from any type of ancestry. Here's a hypothetical scenario. Imagine an East Asian and a European person have a child together. The Asian parent has brown eyes (2 alleles for brown eyes - homozygous). The White/European parent has blue eyes (2 alleles for blue eyes - homozygous). Their child together will automatically have one allele for brown eyes and one allele for blue eyes (heterozygous). Imagine that biracial child marries a fully East Asian person who has brown eyes. Their child(ren) will be roughly 75% Asian but could carry one allele for blue eyes (if it gets passed down from the biracial parent). If the future generations continue to marry fully Asian people, the allele for blue eyes could continue to get passed down even when the European ancestry has become such a small percentage. Eventually you will end up with a fully Asian person that carries the gene for blue eyes (as long as that allele continues to be inherited). This is how new traits and genes are introduced into populations that they didn't originate in.

Genetics are way more intricate than the average person thinks. Our DNA comes from many generations of people that existed prior to us and our parents AKA ancestors. A "genetic throwback" is really just a recessive trait that has been masked for generations (by a dominant trait) but suddenly appears again when two people who unknowingly both carry that recessive allele have a child together.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a carrier of the trait, as was my mom. My mom told me I was negative so I was totally surprised when I came up positive during my pregnancy labs. This is not a big deal and not worth you getting an amniocentesis over. Your child has a 50 percent chance of being a carrier. One of my kids is, the other isn't. We need to stay well hydrated and listen to our bodies, that is all. Please calm down. And not only black people can have it. This is misinformation.

Not everyone that has sickle cell trait is black, but everyone that has sickle cell trait has a black ancestor. They traced the origin of the gene back to one child that lived in Africa 7,300 years ago.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-43373247

https://www.the-independent.com/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/hidden-black-ancestry-linked-to-rise-in-sickle-cell-blood-disorder-738008.html

This is true. This is how there are people that physically appear to be fully European that have sickle cell trait or disease. The African ancestry decreases with each generation, but the sickle cell allele can keep getting passed down. The ancestry won't always show up on an ancestry DNA test either because those tests only go back 6-8 generations. I was taught that we are to screen every patient regardless of what they self-report their background as or what they physically appear to be for this exact reason. Not every medical professional is aware of this or follows this protocol though.

This, this, this. I tested positive for sickle cell trait (not the disease). I took an ancestry test, and it said 2.7% Sub-Saharan African. I look fully European (obviously).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a carrier of the trait, as was my mom. My mom told me I was negative so I was totally surprised when I came up positive during my pregnancy labs. This is not a big deal and not worth you getting an amniocentesis over. Your child has a 50 percent chance of being a carrier. One of my kids is, the other isn't. We need to stay well hydrated and listen to our bodies, that is all. Please calm down. And not only black people can have it. This is misinformation.

Not everyone that has sickle cell trait is black, but everyone that has sickle cell trait has a black ancestor. They traced the origin of the gene back to one child that lived in Africa 7,300 years ago.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-43373247

https://www.the-independent.com/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/hidden-black-ancestry-linked-to-rise-in-sickle-cell-blood-disorder-738008.html

This is true. This is how there are people that physically appear to be fully European that have sickle cell trait or disease. The African ancestry decreases with each generation, but the sickle cell allele can keep getting passed down. The ancestry won't always show up on an ancestry DNA test either because those tests only go back 6-8 generations. I was taught that we are to screen every patient regardless of what they self-report their background as or what they physically appear to be for this exact reason. Not every medical professional is aware of this or follows this protocol though.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Shocked by these responses.
This is a serious big deal. Just like it would be to hide infertility. This might not be a big deal for some but is for OP so one should be dismissing her concerns.

No, it’s not even close to hiding infertility. It should have been mentioned to make sure that the partner is not a carrier as well, but being a carrier doesn’t affect quality of life. SCD develops when inherited from both parents.

According to a previous poster, this is incorrect. See quote below.

"It's a widespread myth that sickle cell trait is always asymptomatic. Sickle cell trait is an intermediate phenotype, not a true asymptomatic carrier state. A proportion of individuals with SCT WILL have pain crises and other symptoms. Think of the trait as a less severe version of the disease. OP, I can't decide for you if you're in the right to be angry. I can only provide you with scientific facts."

Thank you for spreading awareness.

My husband and 2 (out of 5) of our daughters have sickle cell trait. My older daughter is symptomatic. She experiences pain crises that are brought on by triggers. It is difficult to get doctors to take us seriously because most do not know it is possible for the trait to cause symptoms (as in our daughter's case). We are also Bangladeshi which leads to more difficulty. We live in the UK and it is the common belief within the NHS that it is only found in people from Black African and Black Caribbean backgrounds. We have had doctors tell us we must be mistaken because sickle cell does not affect South Asians. One was even convinced that we had gotten thalassaemia and sickle cell confused.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Shocked by these responses.
This is a serious big deal. Just like it would be to hide infertility. This might not be a big deal for some but is for OP so one should be dismissing her concerns.

No, it’s not even close to hiding infertility. It should have been mentioned to make sure that the partner is not a carrier as well, but being a carrier doesn’t affect quality of life. SCD develops when inherited from both parents.

According to a previous poster, this is incorrect. See quote below.

"It's a widespread myth that sickle cell trait is always asymptomatic. Sickle cell trait is an intermediate phenotype, not a true asymptomatic carrier state. A proportion of individuals with SCT WILL have pain crises and other symptoms. Think of the trait as a less severe version of the disease. OP, I can't decide for you if you're in the right to be angry. I can only provide you with scientific facts."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is he Black? It is common knowledge that Black people must be screened for sickle cell due to it being more common in that demographic. Other racial/ethnic groups have other conditions that must be screened for. When I was pregnant, I had to fill out a form at the OBGYN that asked about both of our ethnic backgrounds so that they would know what they needed to test for.

WTF. Most Black people are not screened for sickle cell.

"As part of its Sickle Cell Initiative, the American Red Cross currently tests all donations for the sickle cell trait from self-identified African Americans. Last month, the screening was expanded to include those who identify as multiracial. The screening involves a simple blood test.

It is estimated that about 1 in 13 Black or African American babies in the United States is born with the sickle cell trait, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. However, many individuals are unaware if they carry the trait as testing at birth was not widely provided until 2006."

https://www.redcross.org/local/michigan/about-us/news-and-events/press-releases/raising-awareness-about-sickle-cell-disease--testing-and-need-fo.html?srsltid=AfmBOorvybEZJD1K__ScNeQ09e7CqJg8oS6BKDsf2WU_hqsWeXan3r6L

"If an individual does not want their donation to be screened for sickle cell trait, they should select the “I prefer not to answer or other” response regarding their race and ethnicity. Only donations from self-identified multiracial and Black or African American donors will be screened for sickle cell trait."

https://www.redcrossblood.org/faq.html

BS policies like this are why I always check the Pacific Islander box as a fully Black woman. As soon as they see that Black/African box checked, they start treating you differently than they would an individual of another race. Apparently you can't even donate blood in peace as a Black person. How is the Red Cross only screening the blood of Black (and part Black) donors for a genetic blood disorder (sickle cell) not considered discrimination???

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure what to make of this. It's standard to offer genetic testing for recessive genes as part of preconception counseling. My thought is that, if this were something you were really concerned about, you would have gotten the genetic testing. It's concerning that your husband didn't tell you beforehand. But many people are carriers for genes without knowing it, and so if it were really a problem for you, I would have thought you would have opted for the screening.

Isn't it also the case that sickle cell gene confers some benefits, like resistance to malaria?

If they don't live in or travel to malaria infested areas, then that benefit would not be particularly useful. Sickle cell trait poses more of a risk than a protection to people who live outside of malaria infested areas. This is why the gene was only selected for in people that come from regions where malaria is prevalent.

Malaria is moving toward more temperature regions.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is he Black? It is common knowledge that Black people must be screened for sickle cell due to it being more common in that demographic. Other racial/ethnic groups have other conditions that must be screened for. When I was pregnant, I had to fill out a form at the OBGYN that asked about both of our ethnic backgrounds so that they would know what they needed to test for.

WTF. Most Black people are not screened for sickle cell.

"As part of its Sickle Cell Initiative, the American Red Cross currently tests all donations for the sickle cell trait from self-identified African Americans. Last month, the screening was expanded to include those who identify as multiracial. The screening involves a simple blood test.

It is estimated that about 1 in 13 Black or African American babies in the United States is born with the sickle cell trait, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. However, many individuals are unaware if they carry the trait as testing at birth was not widely provided until 2006."

https://www.redcross.org/local/michigan/about-us/news-and-events/press-releases/raising-awareness-about-sickle-cell-disease--testing-and-need-fo.html?srsltid=AfmBOorvybEZJD1K__ScNeQ09e7CqJg8oS6BKDsf2WU_hqsWeXan3r6L

"If an individual does not want their donation to be screened for sickle cell trait, they should select the “I prefer not to answer or other” response regarding their race and ethnicity. Only donations from self-identified multiracial and Black or African American donors will be screened for sickle cell trait."

https://www.redcrossblood.org/faq.html

BS policies like this are why I always check the Pacific Islander box as a fully Black woman. As soon as they see that Black/African box checked, they start treating you differently than they would an individual of another race. Apparently you can't even donate blood in peace as a Black person. How is the Red Cross only screening the blood of Black (and part Black) donors for a genetic blood disorder (sickle cell) not considered discrimination???

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Shocked by these responses.
This is a serious big deal. Just like it would be to hide infertility. This might not be a big deal for some but is for OP so one should be dismissing her concerns.

No, it’s not even close to hiding infertility. It should have been mentioned to make sure that the partner is not a carrier as well, but being a carrier doesn’t affect quality of life. SCD develops when inherited from both parents.

According to a previous poster, this is incorrect. See quote below.

"It's a widespread myth that sickle cell trait is always asymptomatic. Sickle cell trait is an intermediate phenotype, not a true asymptomatic carrier state. A proportion of individuals with SCT WILL have pain crises and other symptoms. Think of the trait as a less severe version of the disease. OP, I can't decide for you if you're in the right to be angry. I can only provide you with scientific facts."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Red Cross screens ALL blood for a lot of stuff including Sickle Cell Trait. Some people can't safely receive that blood, most can. Look it up.

Well, they don't screen ALL blood for sickle cell. They make it clear that they only screen blood from black and part black donors for sickle cell.

"As part of its Sickle Cell Initiative, the American Red Cross currently tests all donations for the sickle cell trait from self-identified African Americans. Last month, the screening was expanded to include those who identify as multiracial." - https://www.redcross.org/local/michigan/about-us/news-and-events/press-releases/raising-awareness-about-sickle-cell-disease--testing-and-need-fo.html?srsltid=AfmBOorvybEZJD1K__ScNeQ09e7CqJg8oS6BKDsf2WU_hqsWeXan3r6L

"If an individual does not want their donation to be screened for sickle cell trait, they should select the “I prefer not to answer or other” response regarding their race and ethnicity. Only donations from self-identified multiracial and Black or African American donors will be screened for sickle cell trait." - https://www.redcrossblood.org/faq.html

Because it impacts the blood product itself, because they don't have infinite financial resources for testing, and because the carrier rate is astronomically higher in populations with African ancestry. It's a scientifically based decision to get the most bang for their buck, not some racist crusade. I guess it's also sexist that only women are carriers of hemophilia and Duchenne muscular dystrophy?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Shocked by these responses.
This is a serious big deal. Just like it would be to hide infertility. This might not be a big deal for some but is for OP so one should be dismissing her concerns.

No, it’s not even close to hiding infertility. It should have been mentioned to make sure that the partner is not a carrier as well, but being a carrier doesn’t affect quality of life. SCD develops when inherited from both parents.

According to a previous poster, this is incorrect. See quote below.

"It's a widespread myth that sickle cell trait is always asymptomatic. Sickle cell trait is an intermediate phenotype, not a true asymptomatic carrier state. A proportion of individuals with SCT WILL have pain crises and other symptoms. Think of the trait as a less severe version of the disease. OP, I can't decide for you if you're in the right to be angry. I can only provide you with scientific facts."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure what to make of this. It's standard to offer genetic testing for recessive genes as part of preconception counseling. My thought is that, if this were something you were really concerned about, you would have gotten the genetic testing. It's concerning that your husband didn't tell you beforehand. But many people are carriers for genes without knowing it, and so if it were really a problem for you, I would have thought you would have opted for the screening.

Isn't it also the case that sickle cell gene confers some benefits, like resistance to malaria?

If they don't live in or travel to malaria infested areas, then that benefit would not be particularly useful. Sickle cell trait poses more of a risk than a protection to people who live outside of malaria infested areas. This is why the gene was only selected for in people that come from regions where malaria is prevalent.

Malaria is moving toward more temperature regions.