People of Indian subcontinental origin. South Asians. Are at higher risk for heart-related disease than other world populations. Probably every year one of the big newspapers has a feature focusing on this issue. If you are a person of subcontinental background you will not find this fact surprising. I’m willing to bet, judging by my family history, that I’ll die of heart-related problems rather than cancer. This isn’t something specific to people of Indian origin, I have a good friend who is a conventional white American who sees the same pattern in his pedigree: everyone dies of cardiovascular disease before they die of cancer. I know people who expect the opposite.

Right now, it is the turn of The Washington Post, South Asian Americans face disproportionately higher risks of heart disease, other cardiovascular ailments:

South Asian Americans — people with roots in Nepal, India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Bhutan and the Maldives — have a disproportionately higher risk of heart disease and other cardiovascular ailments. Worldwide, South Asians account for 60 percent of all heart disease cases, even though — at 2 billion people — they make up only a quarter of the planet’s population.

One common refrain is that socioeconomics explains between-group differences. But in the USA Indian Americans are the wealthiest and most educated ethnic group. Many people who are colleagues of Indian Americans begin to notice the high propensity for heart diseases amongst their South Asian friends. People who are vegetarian. People who live the same “healthy lifestyle” as their professional peers.

Obviously, there are environmental factors. There is evidence that the “modern” vegetarian diet is particularly unhealthy. Lots of fried and refined carbs. Also, many immigrants from the subcontinent from upper-class backgrounds may not emphasize fitness to the same extent as their native-born American peers, for whom jogging and fitness is a signal of their social status. In contrast, a plump shape is often considered a sign of good-living by a certain age for people who are not from peasant backgrounds in the subcontinent. But I haven’t talked to anyone who has looked closely who denies the genetic element.

This brings me to the question I asked below in an open thread: does telling people they have a genetic risk serve any purpose? Does it help? Does it hurt? A lot of geneticists seem to be very invested today in fixing upon “systemic” issues to explain different predispositions between groups. With Indian Americans, it is different because they are wealthier and more well educated than the average American. A large fraction work in medicine. Yes, diet and culture, but that can’t be everything. It is well known Indian Americans shouldn’t follow the BMI guidelines for white Americans.

But does telling brown people that we’re born this way help us?

My own position is that does help us. We can’t let all things be equal. Period.