top of page

It’s in our DNA: The resurgence of eugenics & health propaganda

Updated: 12h

by Temi Jolaawo for The 44 North, Guest Writer


"If smaller, digital forms of consumer-driven eugenics remain normalized and unchecked, the ideology of eugenics risks evolving from past atrocities such as forced sterilization, segregation, or genocide to a widespread belief system; a system so covert that it could become a harmful and pervasive belief entirely under the radar."

“Let the parents go on—we need 500 of these models,” was the first supposedly ‘harmless’ comment I saw under a viral lip-sync video. However, when I continued scrolling, the tone of these comments only grew more disturbing. Comments such as “Keep producing to better humanity,” “They have good genes,” and “Imagine a world with a billion Scandinavians instead of Indians” each received hundreds of likes. The four girls in the video—platinum hair and sapphire eyes—were undeniably gorgeous, but the comments had little to do with admiration. Instead, they revealed something far more troubling: The recent rebrand of an age-old ideology made new. This ideology is called eugenics, and it should not be resurrected. 


Eugenics isn’t a new word by any means. We’ve seen it in the Fitter Family Competitions that rated families based on physical traits and perceived social status, in the Nuremberg Laws of 1935, aiming to prevent “race defilement,” and in the forced sterilization of countless innocent women deemed unsuitable for reproduction. Eugenics has been admonished by most of the modern greater society, particularly after becoming synonymous with World War II. Nonetheless, eugenics, like any other damaging movement, has wound itself back into mainstream conversations. Eugenics never disappeared—it simply adapted.


Eugenics is a scientifically refuted worldview that aims to “improve a population’s genetic composition” through selective breeding (Merriam-Webster, n.d.). It misinterprets the Mendelian law of genetics, believing complex human characteristics can be passed down as simply as single-gene traits. Eugenics claims that human traits such as intelligence, criminality, and other social behaviours could simply be “bred out.”


Now, eugenics appears in more subtle ways: In pseudo-scientific articles that claim certain races face discrimination based on genetic differences, in groups of people who advocate for wealthy individuals to reproduce to “save the human race,” or via that one guy across the street who is against interracial relationships on the premise of ‘protecting racial purity.’ These examples all fall under the umbrella term ‘consumer-driven eugenics,’ the modern reinvention of a centuries-old doctrine. Although consumer-driven eugenics may not be as invasive or overt as previous forms of the ideology, this ‘soft’ or ‘social’ form of eugenics still reinforces the same dehumanizing notion that certain individuals are fundamentally superior to the people around them, and that humans exist in genetic tiers or hierarchies.


Many social hierarchies, such as caste systems, feudalism, white supremacy, and colonial structures, have unjustly held power throughout history. While none is inherently worse or more palatable than the other, eugenics differs slightly. Eugenics not only upholds existing hierarchies—particularly white supremacy—to rank the value of an individual’s genes based on racism, ableism, and misogyny, but it also seeks to enforce these views through physical and often coercive means. This is where I believe eugenics shifts from a hierarchy to an ideology, becoming a complex worldview. It aims to take tangible measures to reach its goal of human perfection.


Eugenics, then, became actionable in two ways: Positively and negatively. Positive eugenics aims to promote reproduction between people who are genetically sound, and negative eugenics discourages, or forcibly bars, reproduction between people deemed genetically inferior (NIH, n.d). For example, in 1933, the American Birth Control League wrote, “Birth Control is of importance when it advocates birth selection by encouraging reproduction of the mentally, physically, and socially adequate and the birth restriction of those not so equipped (Whitney, 1933, p. 85).”


In 1924, the Sterilization Act in Virginia was passed, allowing the state to sterilize anyone deemed “feeble-minded” by force (NIH, 2021). But what did ‘feebleminded’ really mean? It could mean “intellectually inferior,” “troublesome,” or simply “promiscuous” by the state—all ambiguous definitions allowing the state to dictate who had the right to reproduce—who got to be seen in future generations—at its discretion.


The terms ‘feebleminded’ and ‘promiscuous’ are what condemned 18-year-old Carrie Buck to forced sterilization in Virginia, for example. The state didn’t ask about her mother’s past, or the fact that Carrie herself had been unwillingly assaulted; rather, they wanted to sterilize her to “prevent her from passing her perceived feeblemindedness to future generations (Kalomiris, 2022)." The state of Virginia saw someone a notch below perfect on the genetic social hierarchy, a problem that needed to be fixed, erased, and barred from the possibility of future reproduction.


Although there are notable victims such as Carrie Buck, many victims worldwide remain unknown; victims who lost their right to autonomy because they were deemed “genetically inferior” by the state (Lira, 2018). There has been a steady decline in reports of state-supported eugenics, especially after its negative connotations to Nazi Germany when it “flourished during the three decades before the end of World War II (NHGRI, 2022).” Despite this, I believe that through our culture’s thought processes, laws, and opinions, consumer-driven eugenics persists. 


This form of eugenics manifests itself in smaller settings. Instead of state-led eugenics campaigns, this modern-day form of eugenics is often a personal choice—many individuals, small corporations, and even politicians seem to believe in worldviews similar to those of past eugenicists, such as anti-immigration sentiments and “great replacement” ideologies (Sear, n.d). People who believe in modern-day eugenics have found ways to sanitize certain terms. For example, instead of overtly claiming racial superiority, they speak in dog whistles, such as referencing “genetic differences.” This sanitization of eugenics has allowed its notions to be publicly shared, discussed, and normalized with little to no opposition. 


The normalization of eugenics becomes especially harmful when done through social media, given its efficiency and reach. Social media—although implicitly—has contributed to the recent rebranding of eugenics. Its algorithms often recommend personalized, polarizing content that can expose users to and amplify radical ideologies, including eugenics. While the process of radicalization may be complex, social media encourages divisive content and provides a platform for it to spread (Shaw, 2023). This is further exacerbated by social media’s global reach, which turns ideas that would otherwise be an individual’s ideology into a worldwide discussion. As a result, radical, eugenicist ideologies can gradually become more visible and even more normalized in mainstream media.


Although social media can’t be blamed as the sole driver of rebranding eugenics, it plays a critical role, even during our most recent wars. A clear example is the war in Sudan, where there was a stark difference in the way the media and society acknowledged the inhumane conditions Sudanese civilians endured (Booty et al., 2025). Russia’s war on Ukraine, for example, was met with greater sympathy and empathetic language toward refugees, showing that many still believe, even if implicitly, that some lives matter more than others. 


In smaller-scale online situations, comments praising only one kind of beauty or employing hate speech have risen. It doesn’t take much scrolling through Instagram reels, for example, to see negative comments under a video of an interracial couple, claiming they’re “traitors to their own race.” These negative comments—reflective of old, harmful ideologies—have seemed to increase in recent years, fueled in part by the counter-cultural push towards conservatism. 


Modern-day eugenics also relies on scientific misinformation and propaganda to sustain its influence and relevance. Health propaganda, widely spread online, fuels skepticism and distrust among different groups of people, promoting division and keeping the movement relevant. The “dying white race,” for example, is a narrative that ignites fear of an “imminent white genocide” (Levine-Rasky, 2014). These theories misrepresent demographic data and weaponize it against other groups without addressing the broader societal trends. This “data” is then used to justify eugenics and similar ideologies. 


“Genetic inferiority” is also an ideology commonly spread online. These ideologies, as noted by prominent individuals such as Elon Musk, hold that wealthy people have a responsibility to pass on their genes and to “better society” (Schmitz, 2025). These are only two instances of health misinformation seen online, but many remain. If smaller, digital forms of consumer-driven eugenics remain normalized and unchecked, the ideology of eugenics risks evolving from past atrocities such as forced sterilization, segregation, or genocide to a widespread belief system; a system so covert that it could become a harmful and pervasive belief entirely under the radar.


If the damaging social effects of eugenics aren’t frightening enough, research indicates that eugenics is scientifically misinformed. The essential ideals of eugenics are based on scientific racism or pseudoscience and are discredited by scientific findings (NHGRI, 2022). The basis of eugenics is to protect people with perceived ‘good genes’ from extinction, and to promote their genes to the future generation. Ironically, eugenics goes directly against its main objectives.


Eugenics discourages certain phenotypes from reproducing, promoting one kind of human. This is detrimental to genetic diversity, which does more harm than good for humanity. Gibson (2018) noted that, “Disease protection is among the most well-supported consequences of genetic diversity in populations.” With a lack of genetic variation, humanity is limited and cannot adapt to our ever-changing environment, ultimately making us more vulnerable to extinction and disease. In the words of Sear (n.d), “Eugenics really is ideology, not science.”


Modern-day eugenics is a concept with disturbing potential in today’s world. Every joke resembling eugenic ideals of the past threatens to normalize harm. Those portrayed as dangerous by modern-day eugenics are often the ones who live in constant fear of the society that targets them. 


Understanding the past is crucial to preventing the ever-present resurgence of eugenics. Although we’ve improved, we still have work to do. Eugenics hasn’t been removed from our laws, our systems, or our opinions. It’s “the very foundation of our current cultural mindset and our present modes of thinking, being, and doing” (“Historical Chronology”, 2021-2024, p. 3). We need to address the recent rise of eugenics, especially online, and tackle our obsession with “the ideal human.” Maybe our pursuit of human perfection has obscured our appreciation for humanity.


Editor's Note:


The following article reflects the views & analysis of the author. As with all opinion and essay submissions, the piece has been edited for clarity and reviewed carefully for factual accuracy, but the interpretations & arguments are the author’s own. The 44 North publishes an array of perspectives & voices to encourage and ensure thoughtful engagement with complex social, political, historical, and cultural issues.



References


Temi Jolaawo is a volunteer, community leader, and 11th-grade student who attends Nanaimo Christian School in BC, Canada. As a recent volunteer for Island Health, Temi Jolaawo is actively committed to nurturing her interests in public health and social issues/justice. Temi currently enjoys playing sports, listening to music, and making art. Through the art non-profit she founded, “CreationStationNanaimo,” she shares her love for art and creativity with various children in the community.


Outbreaks in a Post-COVID World

by Emerson Prentice for The 44 North, Contributing Writer - Politics


Hantavirus through a microscope, via the CDC
Hantavirus through a microscope, via the CDC
"Unlike COVID-19, for many, the horrific memories of the 2014 Ebola outbreak have faded." 

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) responded to a hantavirus outbreak reported on May 2. The outbreak resurfaced panic and fears from the COVID-19 outbreak of the 2020s. Despite reactions, global health organizations like the World Health Organization (WHO) assure the risk from hantavirus to the US is low.  


The Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) is experiencing its own outbreak of a different nature—Ebola. On May 15, researchers identified an outbreak of a rare strain. It's a species of Ebola unlike that which scientists have seen before. Both the hantavirus and Ebola virus have confounded scientists tracking the outbreaks because of the unique nature of the strains. 


The two outbreaks in quick succession and in close proximity to the COVID pandemic have shaped public response—fear is top of mind, and trust in public health officials globally is low. Aid has also been lacking as the outbreak has since outpaced the response. 


Like for hantavirus, the CDC says that the risk of Ebola to the US remains low. However, the situation in the DRC continues to be deeply concerning. As of June 3, there have been 62 confirmed deaths from Ebola, though officials from WHO and other public health organizations believe the true death toll may be far higher. They also warn that this outbreak has the potential to be the largest in history, which could, in part, be due to the rollback of aid from the US during the Trump administration. 


Obtaining an exact count of those infected by Ebola is an obstacle, not for lack of testing but for lack of existing tests due to the rare strain. And even when there is sufficient testing available, disseminating results to patients can be a lengthy and difficult process, due to the terrain in the DRC and conflict in the surrounding area. 


Medical officials have further expressed frustration with the speed of the global response, considering the potential severity of the outbreak. The lack of funding invested in proper testing for the disease is playing a role in the slow-moving response. For this strain, there is no vaccine or proven treatment, despite pledges to develop adequate testing and treatments—like those from the company KH Medical—even when it’s not commercially beneficial. 


In the resurgence of Ebola, past survivors like Patrick Faley remind people what the previous outbreak—which took the lives of 11,000—looked like. Unlike COVID-19, for many, the horrific memories of the 2014 Ebola outbreak have faded. 


Photograph from the last Ebola outbreak in West Africa in 2014. Via Getty Images.
Photograph from the last Ebola outbreak in West Africa in 2014. Via Getty Images.

Faley outlined how an Ebola outbreak is especially devastating because of the way in which it attacks communities. Families can no longer properly care for their loved ones or carry out rituals with the dead without the danger of infection, particularly because of the lack of protective gear.  


The Trump administration is also taking dramatic precautions to deal with returning passengers to the US who were exposed to the hantavirus. Following a three-week quarantine, they will be closely monitored by public health workers or law enforcement for an additional three weeks. 


These restrictions have exceeded those which were imposed during the hantavirus outbreak in 2018, which was successfully contained. Practices in 2026 are in stark contrast to Trump’s criticisms of ‘overly strict’ COVID-19 restrictions. 


Fear of infection may still be justified, particularly with increasing global travel during the World Cup. For most individuals, though, common infections like respiratory and intestinal viruses would be expected—not Ebola or the hantavirus. Vaccination rates in America, Canada, and other countries have also been falling, which further increases the potential threat of infections to the public. 


Amid the outbreak, the Trump Administration’s focus has been on protecting US soil from infection rather than providing aid. Trump has emphasized isolationist policies despite growing concerns from public health officials about the potential global repercussions. This approach is further highlighted in his travel bans and mandated quarantines in Kenya for US citizens.  


Trump’s response mirrors that which he implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic—the prioritization of a border sealed from external infection. 


On May 18, the CDC and the DRC began implementing travel screening and entry restrictions to manage the outbreak. If you have recently travelled through an affected country, you’re advised to follow travel health notices and seek medical attention if you develop symptoms. 


The danger of the largest Ebola outbreak in history and its global impacts continues to loom amid slow aid reaction, surging fears, and an increasing spread. 

Emerson Prentice is a Freshman at Stanford studying Anthropology. At school, she is the Campus Life desk editor for the Stanford Daily, a DJ for the campus radio station KZSU, and an associate producer for the Stanford Storytelling Project’s award-winning podcast, “State of the Human.” For fun, Emerson also loves to run, cook, and birdwatch!


An Interview with Apuroopa Kavikondala: On Mental Health Action Week at Purdue University

by Mikaela Brewer for The 44 North, Senior Editor


The Winner of MHAW’s Philanthropy Challenge, in partnership with Mental Health America, Wabash Valley Region, via Apuroopa Kavikondala
The Winner of MHAW’s Philanthropy Challenge, in partnership with Mental Health America, Wabash Valley Region, via Apuroopa Kavikondala

"Now the president of MHAW 2027, I’m incredibly excited to continue fostering this mission and environment on Purdue’s campus with our Boilermakers, because the impact won’t stay in West Lafayette; it’ll grow everywhere." 

Editor’s Note:


Mental Health Action Week (MHAW) is a student-led organization at Purdue University that brings a dedicated week of mental health programming to campus each spring (March 2-6th, 2026, this year). For the past seven years, they’ve fostered a campus culture rooted in support, understanding, and resilience around mental health. 


The MHAW team believes this initiative not only strengthens their campus but also advances the broader effort to destigmatize mental health. I spoke with MHAW 2027’s president, Apuroopa Kavikondala, about the impact of this work. 



Mikaela Brewer (MB): I’m inspired by how hard you worked to reflect and build in all parts of student life/experience throughout the week: Conversation, academics, community/culture, movement/nourishment, and creativity. What offerings seemed to resonate most with students? With you? Did anything pleasantly surprise you about this year’s lineup, in particular?


Apuroopa Kavikondala (AK): We were so excited to involve all parts of student life during this week! From clubs and student organizations to athletics, the various colleges (such as Engineering and the Business School), and even our very own Recreational Sports Center, which hosted various events in honour of MHAW, to collaboration in our mission, our commitment made MHAW 2026 a success. Some examples of student organizations contributing to our cause include: 

  • Our kickoff celebration in partnership with Purdue Student Government and various other mental health organizations, such as the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention

  • The run club hosting a run in honour of MHAW and mental health

  • Our Unity Day celebration to honour what our well-being thrives on—community and connection. The celebration included food, performances, a creativity fair, our special guest, Purdue Pete (our mascot), and so much more!

  • A stress-board-breaking event by the Taekwondo club, where you’d write your stressors on a board and then break it!

  • A weeklong fundraiser challenge with fraternities, sororities, and cooperative life (FSCL), where half of the donations were directed to philanthropy and half to our partnership with Mental Health America (Wabash Valley Region)


A hand-drawn MHAW 2026 poster, stickers, and t-shirts at an outdoor booth, via Apuroopa Kavikondala
A hand-drawn MHAW 2026 poster, stickers, and t-shirts at an outdoor booth, via Apuroopa Kavikondala

Overall, students loved the variety of events we hosted because no matter what they were interested in, they were able to participate. It made students feel like they belonged and were heard, even in the busyness of our lives.


MB: I love the imagery, story, and metaphor you wove into MHAW. Could you share more about why growth and blooming are so central to what you (and former students!) have built and offered over the past 7 years? 


AK: MHAW used to be a part of the Purdue Student Government (fully hosted by them), so this was our first year as our own organization! The reason we wanted to make growth/plants our theme was that it’s so central to how life works and moves. Everything blooms, and then it falls/decays like leaves in Autumn. In due time, it’ll bloom again, and that’s what mental health and well-being are about. We go through phases, and that’s human! It’s very important to rely on one another and seek support, especially in those times of regrowth. 


MB: You’ve done excellent, empowering work connecting people, staff, resources, spaces, etc., to bring MHAW to life. From the outside, peeking in, it feels real: I see an authentic, full-community, hands-on gathering where everyone both gives and receives care. What did it feel like to nurture these relationships and bring so many people together in support of a shared goal? How might your work be a model for other university students hoping to do something similar? And beyond, across workplaces, politics, etc.?

MHAW logo, via Apuroopa Kavikondala
MHAW logo, via Apuroopa Kavikondala

AK: Purdue has such a great community around well-being and mental health, the MH one being Purdue CAPS (Counselling and Psychological Services), so it was beautiful to see the collaborations come to life during the week. Mental health is universal; we all have it, we all struggle, and we all must learn how to navigate those situations—not alone, but with the help of others. Any other university that wants to implement their own Mental Health Action Week should first recognize other parts of student life that can support it, whether it’s their mental health resources on campus, other mental health/wellbeing-related organizations, or even—especially!—collaborations that aren’t necessarily directly correlated. Mental health is connected to every part of campus life; we can take action from many angles. Ultimately, the reason we wanted to call the ‘A’ in MHAW “action” instead of “awareness” is that it’s time we started creating a more welcoming space for people to use the resources at hand and feel less alone. It’s one thing to talk; it’s another to do. 


Purdue Pete, via Apuroopa Kavikondala
Purdue Pete, via Apuroopa Kavikondala

MB: I’m curious if you, Sunishka (MHAW President, 2026), and your team learned anything about yourselves and your own mental health during MHAW? Designing, creating, and giving something so expansive can be nourishing, of course. But it can also be a lot! In this type of role—which many will relate to across education and mental health care systems—how did you care for yourselves? 


AK: MHAW was definitely a time commitment, but the reason we were so willing to put the time needed into it is that it’s such a great cause—one that’s dear to all our hearts. Even though we organized MHAW, we definitely still felt its impact and resonance in our own lives. During organizing, outreach, and implementation, we made sure to divide tasks among ourselves, ask for help when there was a lot on our plates (because we are, of course, people and students first!), and just tried to do our best wherever possible. MHAW 2026 was possible, honestly, because of a dream team, and I truly am grateful for the reliability and hard work that everyone offered. 


Now the president of MHAW 2027, I’m incredibly excited to continue fostering this mission and environment on Purdue’s campus with our Boilermakers, because the impact won’t stay in West Lafayette; it’ll grow everywhere. 

bottom of page