This same group headed by Professor Beirut (I think they are mostly based at WashU) previously claimed that a SNP in the CHRM2 gene was associated with alcoholism and drug addiction, however the allele that they claimed was protective against alcoholism is actually at a very high allele frequency in Native Americans! (per the SNP chip Native American SNP allele frequency data collected by the PSU molecular anthropologist Mark Shriver). I think 90% (probably more) of reported gene allele associations in the mental health literature are BOGUS and can not be replicated upon further investigation. It is a very sad state of affairs. For example three studies claimed that a SNP haplotype in the 3' end of the CHRM2 gene was significantly associated with IQ. Then last year two large studies (Penelope Lind et al in Behav Genet and a meeting report study by McGue lab at U Minn) showed that the association of CHRM2 with IQ could NOT be replicated. Another large study showed that the claimed link of CHRM2 with major depression could not be replicated. The same story with most other links (e.g. SNPs in the dysbindin/DTNBP1 gene have been linked to schizophrenia and IQ but some studies indicate that this too is all bogus). In my view the weakest link in the whole chain of evidence relating to the HBD paradigm is the distressingly shaky scientific evidence regarding the actual molecular allelic associations of specific genes with IQ and other mental traits and mental diseases. Almost all of the claimed associations are very tenuous and often unreproducible.

Razib, are your CDC data mortality due to diabetes or actual diabetes rates. You show that diabetes is negatively correlated with %Hispanic, perhaps this is true if you are looking at mortality. Remember that Hispanics tend to have lower mortality than would be expected based on their SES/SEP or based on their cognitive ability (mortality rates tend to increase when SES/SEP or cognitive ability decreases). The fact that Hispanics have lower mortality than would be expected is called the Hispanic Paradox. 
 
Check out this paper posted on the Nature Precedings website.  
 
http://precedings.nature.com/documents/2862/version/1 
 
It shows that in California Hispanics have lower mortality than would be expected based on their (rather low) cognitive ability (as measured by 7th grade math test scores). The paper postulates that the surprisingly low mortality rates of Hispanics may be due to their CHRM2 allele that codes for higher vagal nerve activity. The vagal nerve may serve as the mind-body link for connecting cognition to better health (the vagal nerve is the body's own endogenous anti-inflammatory system, thus vagal nerve signaling may prevent atherosclerosis and perhaps some cancers).

Roy Frye, a pathologist at University of Pittsburgh, has formulated a hypothesis that attempts to explain some of the correlations between ethnicity, cognitive ability, socioeconomic position, and health/mortality.  
 
A pdf of "Cognitive epidemiology of ethnic health and the CHRM2 vagal vigour hypothesis" is freely available here on the Nature Precedings website. 
 
Frye's paper studies how mortality varies between local regions of California with regard to cognitive ability, ethnicity, and socioeconomic position. 
 
Razib said it would "be interesting to see how elevated mortality varies as a function of age". 
 
The supplemental figures in Frye's paper present abundant data showing patterns of age-range variation in mortality in relationship to variations in ethnicity and cognitive ability. 
 
Frye's claim that variation in both IQ and health/mortality reflect pleiotropic effects linked to the rs8191992 SNP variation in the 3'UTR of the CHRM2 is now somewhat dubious because recent studies of large cohorts (Lind et al in Behav Genet and a meeting abstract from McGue's group at Minnesota) have cast doubt on the claim (from three prior studies) that IQ is linked to SNP variation in the CHRM2 gene.

"Why Steve Sailer is wrong" 
 
One reason that this topic is so interesting is that there are at least two meanings of the word "wrong" in connection with the association of IQ, genes, and race: 
 
1)Wrong as in "false" (e.g. Jensen is wrong because there are no significant racial/ethnic differences in the frequencies of IQ-modulating gene alleles...) 
2)Wrong as in "evil" (e.g. Jensen is wrong because his theory is evil and racist...) 
 
Many well-informed liberals (probably including Cowen and Saletan) suspect that Jensen and Rushton are factually correct in their hypothesis that racial/ethnic differences in IQ-type intelligence are largely due to genetic rather than environmental differences. However Cowen and Saletan also strongly feel that it is morally wrong (evil) to believe this. Thus they try to skirt the issue by yammering on about how we all have to consciously ignore the concept of race (Saletan's solution) or we have to be careful avoid becoming evil racists (Cowen's apprehension). 
 
If believing that some racial/ethnic groups are innately inferior to others with regard to IQ-type intelligence is a defacto racist belief, and if it is actually true that some racial/ethnic groups are inferior to others with regard to IQ-type intelligence; then people will have to make a decision if they wish acknowledge the truth and be scientifically correct (and scientifically racist) or if they want to deny the truth and remain politically correct (and remain non-racist). 
 
During the past several decades people in all western nations have been thoroughly inculcated with Boasian views of ethnic/racial equality, it basically constitutes the new secular religion. So the knee jerk tendency of all good-thinking people is to view the Galtonian/Jensenist perspective as inherently racist. I think that if we in the HBD movement are honest with ourselves we can understand why people would see our viewpoint as racist because for all practical purposes and in terms of the common understanding of racism, our viewpoint actually is racist. Now the interesting question becomes, what specific aspects of racism are evil?