Black, Asian, and Native American children are more likely to die from neuroblastoma, study finds

Black, Asian, and Native American children are more likely than white and Hispanic children to die after being treated for neuroblastoma, according to new research on the pediatric cancer. The study, of more than 3,500 patients with the disease, is the largest ever to look at racial disparities in risk and survival for the most common solid cancer found in young children.

http://www.physorg.com/news/2010-11-black-children-die-neuroblastoma.html

The study also found that black and Native American children are more likely to have the high-risk form of the disease and show signs of resistance to modern treatment. Those biological characteristics suggest that genetic factors contribute to the outcome disparities found for neuroblastoma.

"Disparities in outcome according to race do exist in neuroblastoma," said Susan Cohn, MD, professor of pediatrics at Comer Children's Hospital at the University of Chicago Medical Center and senior author of the study. "There are racial cohorts of patients who do more poorly than the white population."

The analysis, published online November 22 by the Journal of Clinical Oncology, uses data collected by the Children's Oncology Group (COG), a partnership of more than 200 clinical sites in North America. Because neuroblastoma is a rare cancer, with only 650 new cases each year in the United States, the large coalition was essential to follow enough patients to answer questions about race and ethnicity, Cohn said.

"This kind of study has largely been impeded by the very small numbers of patients that we see, and the small numbers of minorities within that subset," Cohn said. "Through the COG infrastructure, we are able to collect data on the vast majority of patients who are diagnosed with neuroblastoma in North America. It's a much richer data set."

A subject pool of 3,500 children diagnosed between 2001 and 2009 enabled a research group led by Cohn and Tara Henderson, MD, MPH, Assistant Professor of Pediatrics, to compare children of different races on neuroblastoma risk and survival. While 75 percent of white and Hispanic patients survived five years after diagnosis, only 67 percent of black patients, 63 percent of Asian patients, and 39 percent of Native American patients survived to that point.

Patients diagnosed with neuroblastoma are classified as having low-risk, intermediate-risk, or high-risk disease based on a number of clinical and biological factors. Black children in the study had a higher prevalence of high-risk disease (57 percent) compared to white children (44 percent). Black patients also more frequently displayed individual predictors of high-risk disease, such as older age at diagnosis, stage 4 disease, and unfavorable histology.
___________________________________



An MRI of a 2-year-old girl with known neuroblastoma
___________________________________

"By definition, if you are older and have advanced stage disease, you are at high risk for relapse and more difficult to cure," Cohn said. "The major reason why the black patients do worse is because there are more of them in this high-risk group."

Another disparity emerged when researchers looked at the timing of post-treatment events such as cancer relapse or progression. After two event-free years following diagnosis, black patients with high-risk disease were significantly more likely to suffer a "late-occurring" event than white patients. This observation suggests black patients are more likely to have residual cancer after therapy, Cohn said.

Follow-up studies are underway to look for genetic factors that may predispose black children to high-risk forms of neuroblastoma and chemotherapy resistance. To do so, Cohn's group will partner with the University of Chicago pharmacogenetics team of M. Eileen Dolan, PhD, professor of medicine and Nancy Cox, PhD, professor of medicine.

The team will look for gene variations associated with chemotherapy resistance and the development of clinically aggressive high-risk disease in black and white neuroblastoma patients. The team will work with genome-wide association data (GWAS) provided by John Maris, MD, professor of medicine at the Children's Hospital of Pennsylvania, which identified predictors of high-risk neuroblastoma in a subject pool of white children.

"Our long term goal is to utilize this kind of information to develop individualized therapy," Cohn said. "For example, if you know that a particular patient has a genotype that is associated with resistance to a specific chemotherapeutic agent, you might either modify the dose or treat the patient with a different agent."

The study also offers a potentially unique example of a disparity due primarily to biological, rather than socioeconomic factors. In many adult cancer types, the survival gap between white and minority patients is often attributed to factors such as diminished access to health care, delayed diagnosis, and poorer quality treatment.

But in neuroblastoma, this is less likely to be an issue. Low-risk cancers rarely progress to a higher risk with time, Cohn said, making a delayed diagnosis less likely to affect outcome. Furthermore, treatment for high-risk neuroblastoma – including intravenous chemotherapy, stem cell transplant, and radiation – is largely administered in a hospital setting, removing the effect of compliance, such as missing oral doses of medications at home.

"In many cancers, disparities in outcome appear to be largely due to differences in socio-economic status and environment. For example, the lack of ability to be seen by a doctor in a timely manner and get appropriate care significantly impacts survival," Cohn said. "While multiple factors are also likely to contribute to the disparities we observed in children with neuroblastoma, genetic factors are likely to contribute to the increased prevalence of high-risk tumors in the black cohort, which is quite unique."

Provided by University of Chicago Medical Center

CLICK HERE TO GO BACK TO MAIN PAGE................or HERE TO GO HOME

The Evils of Miscegenation – By Thomas Fairweather

A lot of people probably do not understand the word miscegenation. Basically it means race-mixing or racial-mixed marriages. “Miscegenation” comes from the Latin miscere, “to mix” and genus, “race”.[1] It is something which most people in today’s society do not even raise an eyebrow about. But only a few decades ago in the United States of America miscegenation was illegal. In fact, even an American President by the name of Warren G. Harding was totally against the idea of miscegenation and had mentioned it in a speech that he did. As this is an opinion piece I will give my own views on the issues. Personally I find miscegenation to be abhorrent, something that deluded liberal-minded people do who only see them selves plainly as being “human-beings” rather than humans of a particular race/ethnic group. They do understand their heritage and background that has remained pure for countless generations only to be diluted and spoilt by an act of so-called love or lust. Now this does not just count for ONLY Whites being pure but for people of all backgrounds, whether they are Asian, African, or Arab etc. As noted by Dr. Lundborg ‘a general mixture would certainly result for the whole of mankind in a fateful downfall of the highest culture races and all their achievements.’ [2] Meaning all our unique and amazing cultures that each country has would be ruined eventually over time because of miscegenation. In Australia I feel that this is a major issue which is being ignored by people who seem to accept miscegenation as a “normal” occurrence. The true European heritage of most White Australians is being deteriorated through the frequency of miscegenation in recent times.



http://www.newrightausnz.com/2006/07/25/the-evils-of-miscegenation-by-thomas-fairweather/

Of course, you will always hear the bleating of the usual liberal rhetoric that there is no such thing as miscegenation and that we are all human. Yet they also continue to say that they promote diversity. But the question is…how can we be so sure of their agenda? If they promote diversity yet also promote miscegenation do they not realise that this will eventually cause the world to all become the same mixed “coffee-coloured” people. How is that supposed to be promoting diversity?! Quite a contradictory view don’t you think?

As noted in the National Vanguard ‘of course, miscegenation is not a natural occurrence. Evolution would have been impossible if every evolutionary experiment had been short-circuited by cross-breeding. Nature’s urge toward higher and more complex life forms has demanded that subspecies remain genetically isolated until all possibility of genetic admixture has been removed. Even though such isolation of the various human subspecies from one another has not been of sufficient length to ensure the impossibility of genetic admixture, it has ensured the existence of deep-seated psychological barriers which, under natural conditions, prevent miscegenation.’ [3] This explains how before advancements in technology to travel all around the world people of different races where separated geographically over thousands of years and developed uniquely having their own way of adapting to the environment they lived in, whether it is different shaped eyes, darker shades of skin, etc.

An African American by the name of Emanuel McLittle explains that ‘all living things express a genetic mandate to remain separate. Be it tree, dog, molecule, atom or apples. This fact does not imply a kind of prejudice in the fingers of nature. Instead it speaks to a creative wisdom working to preserve each element, kind, species and race as it was originally created–forming a universe where an unnumbered variety cooperate in the shaping of a beautiful whole. I argue that a similar mandate exists for humans, but unlike the pine tree, a blade of grass, or the great white shark, we can ignore this mandate.’ [4] This of course does not mean that we should ignore our differences but rather celebrate them. People should be proud of their racial/ethnic heritage and not be ashamed of it. They should also not seek to ruin their heritage by committing miscegenation without realising the consequences.

Emanuel McLittle also notes that ‘interracial marriage is often born of a disdain for oneself and an unconscious drive to erase oneself via the next generation. I would venture a guess that many of those who engage in race mixing are running on the legs of buried anger and frustration, from a helpless, painful childhood where their first mates, their parents, failed them. Growing up with a fractured identity of their own, they are often driven by a false notion that they can leave behind one ugly world by merging into another.’ [5] This is quite an interesting view because it discusses how often it is people who do not have happy and fulfilled lives that commit miscegenation. Often, it is Liberalism and covert Marxist ideologies in Western societies that has brought about this downfall. James Buchanan believes that ‘unfortunately decades of Marxist propaganda claiming that the only racial difference is “skin colour” has convinced the cowardly and the foolish to support race-mixing. This brings up the question “How stupid are liberals?” Do they really believe that millions of their fellow Whites oppose race-mixing based solely on something as trivial as skin colour?’ [6] This points out that there are still people out there who do not understand that race is MORE than just about skin colour. It is about cultural, psychological, physiological differences that humans have. Just like we understand that there are different breeds of dogs such as Dobermans, Chihuahuas, Corgis etc which have their own unique characteristics there are also different breeds or races of human beings.

It must be realised that acts of miscegenation will ruin thousands of years of racial/ethnic heritage not just for White people but for every race. Michael J. Polignano argues that a ‘race’s unique genetic identity will be maintained only as long as it remains genetically separate and exclusive, breeding within itself and not breeding with other races. Miscegenation undoes this. Thus it destroys millennia of racial evolution. The genes are not lost, per se, just as no paint molecules are lost when different colors of paint are mixed. But it would take millennia to re-isolate gene types that can be spread out among a miscegenated population in just one generation of crossbreeding’. [7] In many ways it could even be seen as a form of subtle genocide where one race or a number of races are eventually destroyed by “breeding” out the characteristics of a particular race and amalgamating them with a number of others. This is particular harmful to people of European heritage because of their non-dominant genes. For example, if a woman from Norway with blonde hair and blue eyes and white skin miscegenated with an African man from Sudan with dark brown hair and brown eyes and black skin then if they produce a child it will have the dominant genes of dark brown hair and brown eyes and black or possibly brown skin. For any people who want to partake in miscegenation they must realise that their child will bare almost no resemblance to them whatsoever because of the unfortunate fact or their non dominant genes. That is why it is important not only for White people but for people of all races to keep their racial uniqueness by discouraging miscegenation.

Of course there will always be critics out there who question the agenda of those that are against miscegenation. But those people who believe that miscegenation does not exist or believe in racial equality often have a hidden agenda themselves. They too can be quite delusional in relation to this issue or have a vested interest in supporting miscegenation because they participate in it themselves or a creation from it. They will not or do not see the consequences of miscegenation. Michael J. Polignano argues that ‘it is ironic that miscegenation is promoted by the very people who make a cult of diversity, because in the long run miscegenation completely destroys racial diversity. In the short run, of course, miscegenation does increase diversity by filling the world with a colorful array of mongrels. But in the long run, as pure racial types disappear and mongrels mix with mongrels, this diversity will give way to a brown uniformity. Thus the only way to maintain racial diversity over the long term is to avoid miscegenation’. [8] Just like people need to be aware of the consequences of an “un-wanted” pregnancy they also need to understand the consequences of committing miscegenation. The must realise that their children will possibly have a racial identity crisis as they grow older.

A study in Majority rights shows that there are also health consequences in race-mixing as ‘it is irresponsible for any scientific organization to pretend that race mixing has no adverse health effects and it is obviously inappropriate to portray race mixing as desirable or virtuous’. [9] This relates to the fact that there should not be any assumptions drawn that miscegenation will make racially-mixed humans better and healthier than those who are not when in fact it may possibly be the opposite effect. Eric Thomson says “we often hear people justify race-mixing and other forms of degenerative self-indulgence as being “a person’s own business” – as if to say that it is not our business what sort of society we live in, no matter how bad sociopaths wish to make it’. [10] This can be related to morals and values and how mono-racial parents need to lovingly encourage the view onto their children that they should prefer to “stick with their own kind” as there is nothing wrong or racist with doing that. In fact, if you were to ask a Chinese person or an Indian person whom they would like to marry and raise a family with then almost all of the time they would say they prefer somebody the same. People need to get out of their heads this notion of if you stay with your own kind that is it somehow “racist” as this is a fallacy created by liberals.

Eric Thomson also notes that ‘Unlike the killing of members of one race by another race, a historic practice now deemed to be a crime, the mixing of races kills not one, but every race which engages in it. Race-mixing is therefore the worst example of genocide. Scoffers airily dismiss this statement as nonsense because the offspring of race-mixing are capable of breathing, eating, prattling, and reproducing. In other words, race-mixing produces ‘live’ victims instead of dead ones, but this ignores not only the quality of life, it denies man’s place and his role in the universe, his responsibility to his fellow men and to his posterity. Modern-day liberals are very much concerned with the quality of life rather than the quantity of those who are technically alive because their bodily functions are intact. They advocate euthanasia and abortion because these practices ‘make life better’, regardless of their illogical inconsistency when it comes to capital punishment’ [11] Now this could allegedly be described as a “extremist” view but it just goes to show the hypocritical ideology of liberals and how they believe individualism far outweighs collectivism without realising that there should be a fine balance of both. Why should not one but two races lose their heritage and identity because of miscegenation and the liberal argument that if you say you are against miscegenation you will be labelled a racist or bigot? President Tubman of Liberia argued that “we are opposed to integration. It is a bad thing and we condemn it. Why should we destroy our identity? We love our black skins and we are proud of our heritage. Our country is open to all people of African descent’ [12] If the leader of European country was so bold as to say the such a thing as keeping the racial heritage of their country pure there would be absolute outrage by liberals with comparisons to the Third Reich! Can we not see the blatant double-standards that liberals have in regards to not just questioning miscegenation but any issue in relation to race? There must be people who are not afraid to stand up and say that they are proud of their racial heritage and believe that miscegenation does more harm than good in the long run. Unfortunately we live in a society where people live in fear of being labelled something deemed negative and do not have the strength of character to ignore these labels.

Another issue that needs to be taken into account is how confusing and tragic it must be for those people who are themselves racially mixed and often have problems at school. A CNN report found ‘for example, students who described their race as both black and white reported more difficulties than those who considered themselves solely black or solely white.’ [13] It’s hard to imagine what it would be like for a child which does not really know where they belong. Most upsetting would be if they were the victim of being ostracized because of the fact that they may not be considered “black enough” or “white enough” for the other children, which would lead to frustration and disillusionment for that child. ‘The most common explanation for the high-risk status is the struggle with identity formation, leading to lack of self-esteem, social isolation and problems of family dynamics in biracial households,’ said Professor Udry of maternal and child health at the University of North Carolina School of Public Health, as noted in the CNN report. [14] This shows why miscegenation is a selfish act by the parents of a racially-mixed child. They have no sense of belonging to either race. They are confused and do not know if they are of one ethnic/racial group or the other. Ernest Porterfield explains ‘in addition, these children are faced with problems that tend to produce reactions of guilt, insecurity, anxiety, and emotional instability. Biracial children would like to identify with both parents but find themselves torn between the loyalty they owe each parent. Since they cannot identity with both parents, the child feels resentment towards one or both parents.’ [15] All of these hardships that are created for racially-mixed children could have been avoided if the parents did not commit miscegenation in the first place. Often teenagers may have enough problems knowing where they belong or what they want to do with their lives without having the even more obvious and confusing problem of not understanding what racial/ethnic group they are supposed to be part of.

Miscegenation is an issue that people of all races need to be aware of. Especially if they value their racial heritage and identity and wish to see it continue into the future. Part of being human is our diversity and racial difference is part of that we need to hold dear to our heritage and not forsake it by being blind to the fact that we do all look different. Matthew Nuenke explains that ‘opposition to miscegenation is often lamented as racist, and yet there is sound evolutionary evidence that people like to associate and eventually marry others who are more like themselves. Blacks are more comfortable with Blacks, Jews are more comfortable with Jews, and Asians with other Asians.’ [16] Historical evidence would also show this to be true and how miscegenation is not really a common thing. Of course the arguments by those opposed to this view continue to use liberal propaganda emphasizing the fallacy that race is a cultural “construct” when in fact it is a lot deeper than that. Anybody to think that our differences are only “skin-deep” is surely quite shallow in their understanding of human nature. Andrew Ryan and Peter J. White claim that it is ‘patterns of racial and ethnic prejudice, of in-group loyalty and out-group suspicion, have served an effective evolutionary purpose over the long history of primate and human biological evolution, both in enhancing the competitiveness of the individual breeding population and also in preserving the uniqueness of its distinctive genetic heritage by discouraging interbreeding with the members of disparate sub-species. The evolutionary message is clear. Human groups which lose their internal sense of identity and cohesion in respect to other groups eventually cease to exist as discrete realities.’ [17] This is relevant to the topic of miscegenation because it makes a point that prejudice while often noted as being a bad thing can also be quite beneficial for helping to keep alive the uniqueness of all races. The many different races give us a diverse construct of what it means to be human, whereas miscegenation would only make us bland and all the same with no variety in our physical differences in the long run. Seriously, how boring would it be if in the future we all looked a like?

To sum up, I personally think that miscegenation is something that has been forced onto people especially in Western Countries because of liberalism. It basically comes down to morals and values and people need to realise that if ANY race wants their children to at least have some vague resemblance to them then they need to “stick with their own kind”. Heritage and background should be basic requirements taken into account when thinking about having children and for those people who are responsible enough should understand that it is not a decision that should be taken lightly. Especially, as a lot of us who live in Western countries seem to be part of such a hedonistic, shallow and consumerist society. Mass immigration has also played its part in making the act of miscegenation more prevalent than before and it up to both genders to realise that their ethnic/racial background should always be an important factor in their decision. Basically miscegenation is insidiously evil as it promotes the slow but eventual genocide of all races. I will now leave you with a poem by Rudyard Kipling, one of Britain’s finest poets, in relation to how he was against race-mixing (miscegenation).

THE STRANGER WITHIN MY GATE

The stranger within my gate,
He may be true or kind,
But he does not talk my talk -
I cannot feel his mind.
I see the face and the eyes and the mouth,
But not the soul behind.

The stranger within my gate,
He may be evil or good,
But I cannot tell what powers control -
What reasons sway his mood;
Nor when the gods of his far off land,
Shall repossess his blood.

This was my father’s belief,
And this is also mine;
Let the corn be all of one sheaf -
And the grapes be all one vine,
Ere our childrens’ teeth are set on edge
By bitter bread and wine.

-Rudyard Kipling, Nobel Prize for Literature. (1865 – 1936)[18]

FOOTNOTES

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miscegenation
[2] http://www.anthonymludovici.com/cm_1-3.htm
[3] http://library.flawlesslogic.com/death.htm
[4] http://www.wildernesschurch.com/articles/mixedup.htm
[5] http://www.wildernesschurch.com/articles/mixedup.htm
[6] http://www.whitecivilrights.com/64-percent-of-whites-voted-to-ban-race-mixing-in-georgia_216.html
[7] http://www.nationalvanguard.org/story.php?id=5197
[8] http://www.nationalvanguard.org/story.php?id=5197
[9] http://majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/comments/the_health_consequences_of_race_mixing/
[10] http://www.faem.com/eric/2000/et010.htm
[11] http://www.faem.com/eric/2000/et010.htm
[12] http://www.manticeye.com/article.php?id=45_0_5_0_C
[13] http://www.cnn.com/2003/EDUCATION/11/01/mixed.race.ap/
[14] http://www.cnn.com/2003/EDUCATION/11/01/mixed.race.ap/
[15] http://academic.udayton.edu/race/04needs/s98alouis.htm#Childrenof
[16] http://home.comcast.net/~neoeugenics/joe.htm
[17] http://www.alor.org/Race,%20Culture%20and%20Nation/A%20Critique%20of%20Race%20Mixing.htm
[18] http://www.ety.com/HRP/walshcomments/20020425.htm

CLICK HERE TO GO BACK TO MAIN PAGE................or HERE TO GO HOME

Many Europeans Immune To AIDS-Africans and Jews Have No Immunity

You may possess a genetic mutation. Most people would probably be aghast to learn that one of their genes is malformed. But before you start asking, "What does that mean? Will it make me sick someday? Will I pass it on to my children?" bear in mind that a mutation of the CCR5 gene -- called "delta 32" in its mutated form -- has no adverse effect on humans. In fact, possessing delta 32 could save your life, and the lives of your children.

http://www.medkb.com/Uwe/Forum.aspx/aids/6465/Many-Europeans-Immune-To-AIDS-Africans-and-Jews-Have-No-Immunity

"It's highly unusual," says Dr. Stephen J. O'Brien of the National Institutes of Health in Washington D.C. "Most genes, if you knock them out, cause serious diseases like cystic fibrosis or sickle cell anemia or diabetes. But CCR5-delta32 is rather innocuous to its carriers. The reason seems to be that the normal function of CCR5 is redundant in our genes; that several other genes can perform the same function."

"The non-mutated form is what's called a chemokine receptor," he says. Chemokines are protein distress calls released by an injured region of your body. "The normal function of the CCR5 gene is to act as a retriever of the chemokine distress signal from these bruises, which will then be alleviated by the chemokines."

This may not sound exciting, but delta 32 is a powerful mistake. HIV, the virus that causes AIDS, attacks the human immune system, infecting the white blood cells sent to destroy it. The delta 32 mutation, however, effectively blocks the crucial gateway into human cells the virus needs. In the case of Steve Crohn, whose partner was the fifth person to die from AIDS, possessing the CCR5 mutation has prevented him from contracting the virus.

O'Brien explains further, "In order to have total resistance to HIV, you have to carry two doses of the mutated gene -- one from each parent. If you get only one dose, you will not be resistant to infection. However, you may be able to delay the onset of HIV once you become infected. That's because, in patients with one copy of the mutation, the amount of 'portals' or 'doorways' that HIV can use is reduced by about 50 percent. That slows down virus replication, which is the most important factor in AIDS progression."

O'Brien's work on AIDS led him to another disease that delta 32 could prevent, the plague. "They both, upon entering the body, infect the macrophages, which are the first line of defense against bacterial infections," he says. "Over the course of evolution, many bugs and pathogens have become extinct because the body learned how to defend itself against them. So the ones that are around today, like HIV and the plague, are pretty savvy -- HIV, for example, specifically attacks and kills the very cells that are designed to kill it. Both these pathogens have developed very clever ways around our immunological defenses."

The results of the Eyam study suggest that delta 32 may have helped save Europe from the bubonic plague pandemic. It seems logical, then, that this could be confirmed by an experiment in which the plague bacterium is injected into the cells of someone possessing the delta 32 mutation. "We have attempted to design experiments that allow us to expose the plague to the lymphocytes of different people, including Steve Crohn," O'Brien says. "But so far we haven't been able to design that kind of experiment ... to do that experiment, you would need to isolate that particular kind of cell. You would need to isolate the exact strain of the plague, and you would need to expose them together."

Nevertheless, delta 32 seems to be a formidable defense the human body has developed in response to ages of pathogenic exposure. And though we may just be getting acquainted with it, delta 32 has been protecting humans for ages. O'Brien suspects the mutation has been around since long before the Black Death. "There have been human remains dug up from graves in Scandinavia -- bodies 3,000 and 4,000 years old -- in which they actually found the mutation, through DNA typing. So there are all kinds of pieces in this puzzle that are coming together."


ATC Says - SO there you have it European Americans, stay true to your bloodlines, to not interbreed with mongrel non-white european cultures and preserve the future prosperity and health of your white children!



CLICK HERE TO GO BACK TO MAIN PAGE................or HERE TO GO HOME

Blacks make up disproportionate share of serial killers

http://www.newsnet14.com/2008/01/19/blacks-make-up-disproportionate-share-of-serial-killers/



This is part of a study showing negroids actually dominate in the field of serial killing. This myth of whites being the majority of serial killers and pedophiles must be dispelled!!

A lack of understanding of base rates can lead to misinterpreting research findings and forensic results.4 Consider the oft-quoted fact, “Serial killers are usually white males.” While technically correct, at least for the United States, this statement is incomplete. To understand it properly, the relevant base rates also must be considered. Three different studies of serial murderers found black offender proportions of 16, 20, and 20 percent, and female offender proportions of 9, 10, and 16 percent. According to the 2000 census, the U.S. population is 75 percent white and 49 percent male. So, while disproportionately male, the only reason most serial killers in the United States are white is because most of the population is white. More important, all else being equal, serial killers are less likely to be white in predominantly black or Hispanic areas.
Now, let’s take a look some studies. Pay particular attention to the dates of the data included in each study’s database and its affect on the percentage of African-American serial killers:-

Serial Murderers and Their Victims
Eric Hickey
Wadsworth Publishing 1996
With a database of serial killers from the 1790s to the 1980s compiled in 1991, Hickey found 13% of known cases were African-American.

In another study Hickey removed the decade of the 1790s and with data from the entire 1980s through 1995 included, please note the sharp upsurge in black serial killers:-

With a database of 399 serial killers from 1800 to 1995, Hickey found:
(1) 20% of the killers were black.
(2) 17% were women.

And here’s more:-

Century of Slaughter 1992
Michael Newton
With a database of 800 serial killers from the 20th century, Newton found 16% of cases were African-American

And more:-

Extreme Killing: Understanding Serial and Mass Murder
James Alan Fox and Jack Levin
Crime and Justice, Vol. 23, 1998 (1998), pp. 407-455
Sage Publications 2005
With a database of 558 offenders operating in the United States since 1900, Fox and Levin found:
(1) 86% of the killers are male.
(2) 82% are white.
(3) 15% are black.
(4) 4% are Hispanic.

Nowhere’s the study that more or less proves my point. Introducing Anthony Walsh, whose research covers a 58-year period from 1945 to 2004:-

African Americans and Serial Killing in the Media: The Myth and the Reality
Anthony Walsh
Boise State University
Homicide Studies, Vol. 9, No. 4, 271-291 (2005)
DOI: 10.1177/1088767905280080
© 2005 SAGE Publications
There were many expressions of shock and surprise voiced in the media in 2002 when the “D.C. Sniper” turned out to be two Black males. Two of the stereotypes surrounding serial killers are that they are almost always White males and that African American males are barely represented in their ranks. In a sample of 413 serial killers operating in the United States from 1945 to mid-2004, it was found that 90 were African American. Relative to the African American proportion of the population across that time period, African Americans were overrepresented in the ranks of serial killers by a factor of about 2. Possible reasons why so few African American serial killers are known to the public are explored.

In another abstract referring to Walsh’s work the same database from the past 58-years suggests that the breakdown of African-American serial killers is 21-22% and provides safe, conservative-lite reasons for the continuation of the White male stereotype as well as detrimental societal effects:-

The major source of information on serial killers was the encyclopedias of serial killers written by Newton (1990, 1992, and 2000) and by Wilson and Seaman (1983, 1990), as well as the works of other authors. Newspaper and Internet sources were used for cases that occurred after 1999. The study identified 90 African-American serial killers and 323 White-American serial killers within the time frame of the study. African-Americans were represented among serial killers at a rate approximately twice their average percentage in the population (approximately 10.5 percent) across the 58-year time frame. Why, then, does the media limit its coverage of African-American serial killers?
In answering this question, this study suggests that the media’s fear of racism accusations constrains its coverage of heinous crimes committed by Africa-Americans, compared with the zealousness of its coverage of such crimes committed by Whites. Also, African-American serial killers may have been more hidden from the mainstream culture when their victims were other African-Americans, particularly in the early 20th century. Criminological studies of serial killers also neglect to point out Black overrepresentation in crimes generally considered a White domain. The myth that serial killers are rarely African-Americans has had two detrimental effects. First, Whites tend to argue that Blacks are not sufficiently psychologically complex or intelligent to commit a series of murders without being caught. Second, police tend to neglect the protection of potential victims of serial killers in African-American communities.

Last we have Philip Jenkins of Pennsylvania State University, who quickly puts to rest the myth that serial killers are white males and provides a list Black killers you may not have known anything about:-

African-Americans and Serial Homicide
Philip Jenkins
Pennsylvania State University
“[…] in the mid twentieth century, black offenders were among those claiming the largest number of victims. During the 1930’s and 1940’s, there was a group of such cases including Jarvis Catoe, Jake Bird, and Clarence Hill, all of which can be described as fitting the classic stereotypes of serial murder {Jenkins 1989, 1994}.”
Cases of Extreme Serial Homicide (8 or more victims) by African-Americans:-
Nathaniel R. Code Louisiana 1984-1987
Alton Coleman and Debra Brown Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Illinois 1984
Carlton Gary Georgia 1970-1978
Kevin Haley and Reginald Haley Southern California 1979-1984
Calvin Jackson New York 1973-1974
Milton Johnson Illinois 1983
Devernon LeGrand New York 1968-1975
Michael Player (Marcus Nisby) Southern California 1986

Below is a non-comprehensive list of black serial murderers.
(# of victims in parentheses.)
Daniel Andrew Bowler (3), Richmond, VA
George Russell (3 women), WA state
Timothy W. Spencer (5), Arlington, VA and Richmond, VA
Elton M. Jackson (12), Norfolk, VA area
Carlton Gray (3), Columbus, GA
Mohammed Adam Omar (16 women), Yemen. Omar is Sudanese.
Kendall Francois (8 women), Poughkeepsie, NY and surrounding areas.
Terry A. Blair (8), Kansas City area
Zebra Killers (78), San Francisco
Wayne Williams (33), Atlanta, GA
Some Negro (15), Indianapolis, IN
Vaughn Greenwood (11), LA
Andre Crawford (10), Chicago – southside
Calvin Jackson (9+), NY
Gregory Klepper (8), Chicago – southside
Alton Coleman (8), Midwest
Harrison Graham (7+), N. Philadelphia
Cleophus Prince (6), San Diego
Robert Rozier (6), Miami
Craig Price (3), Warwick, RI
Devine Jones (3+), St. Louis
Maurice Byrd (20+), St. Louis
Maury Travis (17 and rising), St. Louis and possibly also Atlanta
Coral Eugene Watts (13 confessed to, possibly 80), Texas, Michigan, Canada
Hulon Mitchell, a.k.a. Yahweh Ben Yahweh (20+), Florida
Lorenzo Fayne (5 children), East St. Louis, IL
Henry Louis Wallace (9), Charlotte, NC
Reginald and Jonathan Carr (5), Wichita, KS
John Allen Muhammad (a.k.a. John Allen Williams) and John Lee Malvo, (Suspected in 13 to 19 and rising fast), Maryland; Virginia; Montgomery, AL; Baton Rouge, LA; Tacoma, WA; Georgia; Tucson, AZ
Torey Miller (2 homicides, one of which was a freeway drive-by, and the attempted ambush-murder of one St. Louis City police officer), St. Louis, MO.Derrick Todd Lee, (5 women), southern Louisiana
Paul Durousseau, (6, two of which were pregnant women), Jacksonville, FL; Georgia.
Troy Sampson (3), Las Vegas
Edward James (3), Las Vegas (This and the previous Las Vegas worthie were both “thrill” serial killers, who brutally murdered innocent and unsuspecting white people they never even met — EPH)
Eddie Lee Mosley (25 to 30 women), south Florida
Henry Lee Jones (4+), south Florida; Bartlett, TN
Richard “Babyface” Jameswhite (15), New York; Georgia.
Donald E. Younge, Jr., (4), East St. Louis, IL; Salt Lake City, UT.
Lorenzo J. Gilyard (12 women), Kansas City, MO. (May be Missouri’s worst serial killer ever, according to the Kansas City Star.)
Michael Vernon (7), Bronx, NY. Killed at least seven people – 5 in a shoe store for not having his sneaker size and 1 pizza delivery person and 1 gypsy cab driver.
Lamon J. McKoy (2, maybe more). Geneva, NY.
Jake ( ?) Bird, Tacoma, WA. He offed two in Tacoma in the 1940s and admitted to murdering many others nationwide.
Chester Dewayne Turner (12 women), Los Angeles

CLICK HERE TO GO BACK TO MAIN PAGE................or HERE TO GO HOME