In the second half of the twentieth century, Indigenous populations from different parts of the world were identified as key subjects in a wide range of investigations into patterns of human biological variation. Focusing on Amazonia, a prominent region for such research, this paper explores some of the complex relationships between biomedicine, anthropological knowledge, political regimes, and Indigenous rights. We focus on the roles of Francis L. Black (Yale University) and James V. Neel (University of Michigan), leading American scientists working in lowland South America from the 1970s to the 1990s, in knowledge production and scientific disputes at the intersection of human biology and susceptibility to infectious diseases, as well as the use of specific biomedical technologies (e.g., vaccines). During the Cold War, arguments concerning genetically determined susceptibility to infectious diseases and the role of biomedicine in health care for Indigenous populations became highly disputed, as scientists were concerned about how scientific knowledge could be used in the implementation of public policies. We argue that analysis of unpublished debates about the political implications of the trajectory of biomedical research about Amazonian Indigenous peoples helps to broaden and complexify the global history of human biological diversity research in the post–World War II period.

中文翻译：

---

“他们为什么死？”

在 20 世纪下半叶，来自世界不同地区的土著人口被确定为对人类生物变异模式进行广泛调查的关键对象。本文以亚马逊地区这一此类研究的重要地区为重点，探讨了生物医学、人类学知识、政治制度和土著权利之间的一些复杂关系。我们关注 Francis L. Black（耶鲁大学）和 James V. Neel（密歇根大学）的角色，他们是 1970 年代到 1990 年代在南美洲低地工作的领先美国科学家，他们在知识生产和科学争端的交叉点人类生物学和对传染病的易感性，以及特定生物医学技术（例如疫苗）的使用。在冷战期间，关于遗传决定的传染病易感性和生物医学在土著居民医疗保健中的作用的争论变得非常有争议，因为科学家们担心如何将科学知识用于实施公共政策。我们认为，对有关亚马逊土著人民生物医学研究轨迹的政治影响的未发表辩论的分析有助于拓宽和复杂化二战后人类生物多样性研究的全球历史。