Racialicious points us toward the ever-illuminating Freakonomics blog, which excerpts a study that breaks down the behavior, looks, and academic prowess of people of mixed race, specifically those who have one black parent and one white parent. Here are the results:

CONTINUED »

Here's where the white supremacists start worrying about how blacks, Latinos, and Asians are taking over "their" country. New census data indicates that the United States will be majority non-white by 2042, which is eight years earlier than previous estimates. The study also says that the non-white "Hispanic" population (with all of its nebulousness) will double to 30 percent by 2050 — right now, 45 percent of Americans under the age of five are Hispanic.

All other non-white groups are expected to grow over the next 42 years, but not nearly at the rate of the Hispanic population. All in all, remember that, while the various percentages of non-white groups will add up to more than the percentage of whites, it doesn't mean that whites will be the "minority." There will still be more whites in this country than any other racial group, unless "not white" becomes a race by 2050. Feel better, supremacists? [MSNBC]

In one out of 10 U.S. counties, minorities make up more than 50 percent of the population — that's 302 counties with majority-minority populations. In other census news, the population of New Orleans is rising steadily. Also:

* Largest concentration of Hispanics: Starr County, Texas, 97.3%.
* Largest African-American population: Cook County, Ill., 1.4 million.
* Largest concentration of blacks: Claiborne County, Miss., 84.5%.
* Largest increase in Asians: Santa Clara County, Calif., 18,400.
* Largest concentration of American Indian or Alaska Native population: Shannon County, S.D., 87%.
* Largest concentration of whites: Magoffin County, Ky., 98.9%.

[CNN]

The ever-illuminating Freakonomics blog reports on a new study that suggests employees who "sound black" are paid an average of 10 percent less than others.

Do you buy this argument? Do you believe there is such a thing as "sounding black" or "sounding white?" If so, how do you sound?

Black people aren't all the same! It's not news to us, of course, but the results of a study commissioned by black-owned Radio One should at least cause some in the media to question their decisions to portray blacks (and other racial minorities, while we're at it) as a monolithic group. Radio One CEO Catherine Hughes commissioned the study because, she said, "There's a difference (between) articulating that we're not a monolithic community and quantifying it. We really needed to take a snapshot of the black community with all of its textures and nuances and debunk the myth. … We wanted to quantify and qualify the incredible diversity in our community."

The study, for which black Americans ages 13-74 were surveyed, found "11 distinct segments" within black American. These segments include "'connected black teens' who are tech-savvy, optimistic and less familiar with the overt bigotry of the past; 'stretched black straddlers,' who excessively worry about everything from relationships to money; and the affluent 'new middle class' who are most likely to believe that challenges within black communities can best be solved by blacks."

Sometimes it seems like these sorts of studies are so common sense that they're a waste of money and time. But that's until you think about how often so many people forget — or never knew — the generational, cultural, socio-economical, and regional factors that differentiate black people in this country, even as a shared skin color and history bring us together.

What are some of the study's other findings?

CONTINUED »

Bullshit study of the day: A group of economists from Shippensburg University just released a study that links "uncommon names" — you know what they mean — with juvenile delinquency.

"Our results show that unpopular names are positively correlated with juvenile delinquency for both blacks and whites," reads the report. "Furthermore, unpopular names are correlated with factors that increase the tendency towards juvenile delinquency, such as a disadvantaged home environment and residence in a county with low socioeconomic status."

Of course a guy named James, born into a single parent home in a bad neighborhood with bad schools and grows up with bad friends will be able to avoid juvie with more success than a guy named D'Angelo. Right?

"We're arguing it's not the name per se that causes the juvenile to behave badly, but it's the family background," says one of the researchers.

So what exactly is the point? [USAT]

• More and more health officials are questioning why menthol is getting special treatment in a new bill banning flavored cigarettes.

• Blacks with diabetes undergo leg amputations at a far higher rate than whites with diabetes.

• Watch out for those uncooked tomatoes!

• Here are five body parts that human beings no longer need.

• Ever wonder why you're sarcastic? And how?

Considering that these days, a double cheeseburger is cheaper than some pieces of fruit, the stats could definitely be worse… According to a recently-released study on childhood obesity, 14 percent of American white girls, 20 percent of Mexican-American girls, and 28 percent (ouch) of African American girls are obese. The numbers aren't great and the ethnic disparities are even worse, but here's the good news: while the obesity levels haven't fallen, they aren't rising either. Yay? [ABC]

RACIAL, ECONOMIC DIVIDES IN BRAZIL This year, for the first time since slavery was abolished there, blacks will outnumber whites in Brazil. But a whopping education and income gap remains. Black Brazilians make 50 to 70 percent less than whites — larger gap than in apartheid-era South Africa. Racial quotas at public universities have helped the situation, but because of the amount of race mixing in the country, quotas are complicated. I suppose they don't go by that all-American one-drop rule? Experts say it will take 50 years for blacks and whites to achieve income parity. [AP]

WEIRD SCIENCE That shady sludge study that was conducted in the yards of low-income black families in Baltimore? They did it in East St. Louis, too. Recognize a pattern? And consider this: "The study's lead author, Mark Farfel, was chastised by Maryland's highest court in 2001 for earlier research in which 75 poor children were exposed to lead paint." [STLToday]

It probably didn't take more than a few seconds for the scientists behind a recent controversial study on the toxic effects of sludge fertilizer to figure out the best place to run their tests. How about going to a poor black neighborhood where we'll offer residents with children "free lawns" and food coupons in exchange for participating in the government-funded sludge study but not really tell them that the sludge is toxic and dangerous and fail to offer any follow-up medical testing? Perfect!

The purpose of the study was to test whether or not sludge — made from human and industrial waste — can protect children from lead in the soil. What the scientists failed to mention to the nine, low-income Baltimore families that participated, was that some scientists believe that the "heavy metals, pharmaceuticals, other chemicals and disease-causing microorganisms" found in sludge have possible harmful effects.

CONTINUED »

A new report shows that the number of African American professional baseball players continues to decline. According to the University of Central Florida's Institute for Diversity and Ethics in Sports (UCFIDES), in 2006, 8.4 percent of MLB athletes were black. Last year, that percentage fell to just 8.2, the lowest it's been in 20 years. "African Americans just aren't playing it at this point," says Richard Lapchick, the director of the UCFIDES. "They're going to have to increase their efforts." My question: why?

CONTINUED »

Wherein you, the readers, talk amongst yourselves

A recent study found that many white college students avoid socializing with blacks not because they don't want to, but because they are deathly afraid of "messing up" — i.e. saying something that might make them seem racist. In your experience, do you buy this explanation? If so, does the black community hold any responsibility for fostering this anxiety? Why or why not?

FOOD FOR THOUGHT A new study from the University of Liverpool suggests that "Madonna-style adoptions" — high-profile, international adoptions that probably should be called Angelina-style adoptions — have produced more orphans instead of reducing the number. Here's how — in EU countries, the numbers of institutionalized children has increased, supposedly because celebs have influenced more people to seek international adoptions. 'Child Psychologist, Professor Kevin Browne, said: "Some argue that international adoption is, in part, a solution to the large number of children in institutional care, but we have found the opposite is true. Closely linked to the Madonna-effect, we found that parents in poor countries are now giving up their children in the belief that they will have a 'better life in the west' with a more wealthy family."' So more orphans all around? Bummer. [Telegraph]

In November of last year, Time predicted that Oprah's endorsement of Barack Obama would not help the senator in his bid to be the President. Almost six months later, it turns out that Oprah's support produced 10,000 volunteers and a wave of donations for Obama's campaign, and he won two out of the three states in which the talk show host stumped for him. Although Oprah's assistance alone cannot a president make, apparently it can prove Time magazine wrong.

But the so-called "O2 effect" has not been a symbiotic relationship. While Obama's camp asserts he has fared well from his relationship with Ms Winfrey, she can't say the same, according to new research from Fordham University.
CONTINUED »