Many individuals find it challenging to discuss Adolf Hitler without losing the argument. If you feel the need to sequence Hitler’s DNA to grab attention for your TV program, you’ve likely lost the plot.

Yet, this is precisely what Britain’s Channel 4 has undertaken. The documentary Hitler’s DNA: The Dictator’s Blueprint is set to air this Saturday. While I’m reluctantly preparing to watch it, feel free to skip it.

DNA comes from a piece of cloth soaked in blood, cut from the sofa where Hitler shot himself in 1945 and now housed in a museum in the United States. Although the resulting genome contains gaps due to the sample’s age, the Y chromosome reportedly matches that of a male relative of Hitler, suggesting its authenticity.

If this endeavor had been purely academic, aimed at expanding our knowledge—perhaps to verify if Hitler had a rumored Jewish grandfather (he didn’t, according to DNA)—it might have been acceptable. Instead, we are presented with a sensational two-part documentary claiming this DNA evidence “will change the way we perceive Hitler.”

The issue lies in the implication of genetic determinism, suggesting Hitler was predestined to commit horrific acts due to his genes. While this documentary does not directly assert this claim, it comes perilously close. What else could the phrase “dictator’s blueprint” imply?

This line of reasoning is akin to arguing that cloning Hitler would lead to the emergence of numerous murderers. While ethically we disdain such an experiment, the world contains clones in the form of identical twins sharing the same DNA. Studies on twins have been used to assess the degree to which various traits and conditions arise from genetics instead of the environment.

Now, there are numerous challenges with twin research. It’s impossible to entirely disentangle genetic influences from environmental ones, especially as twins generally grow up in similar surroundings. Nonetheless, the best estimates indicate that the heritability of criminal behavior, which likely aligns closely with that of genocidal dictators, is less than 50%. Thus, there is no basis to expect that most clones of Hitler would be tyrants.

Additionally, our grasp of the human genome remains primitive. We still lack the ability to predict straightforward traits like eye color with absolute certainty, let alone more complex characteristics arising from brain and environmental interactions.

What we can do is identify genetic variations statistically associated with higher risk for conditions like autism. Individuals receive a “polygenic score” for each condition. However, possessing a high polygenic score for autism does not guarantee a diagnosis. This situation arises from various factors, including the importance of environmental influences, potential misleading associations, and incomplete identification of significant variants.

“It is crucial to emphasize that, in their current form, autism polygenic scores have no clinical applicability due to inconsistent associations and restricted generalizability,” as concluded in a recent meta-analysis.

The documentary claims that Hitler’s genome rates exceptionally high for autism, alongside mental health issues such as schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and antisocial behavior or psychopathy. His ADHD score is also reported to be above average. However, historical accounts have long suggested that Hitler exhibited such characteristics based on his actions. Genetic data does not yield definitive proof, and established diagnostic criteria do not incorporate genetic information.

More critically, what if he did display these symptoms? Are there alternative explanations for these classifications? As Simon Baron-Cohen from Cambridge University argues in the documentary, the neglect and abuse Hitler faced from his alcoholic father make it “crucial to comprehend why he developed such hatred and anger.”

He further pointed out that traits often linked to schizophrenia might connect with creativity and unconventional thought, possibly accounting for Hitler’s political and military achievements. Is this mere speculation?

For me, this represents the core issue with analyzing Hitler’s genome. We can speculate about potentially valid connections to his personality and behavior, but these could all be entirely incorrect. Moreover, this could worsen the stigma around conditions like autism, schizophrenia, and bipolar disorder.

This documentary undermines its assertions as it largely reiterates established information about Hitler. The main novelty lies in the assertion that Hitler suffered from Kallmann syndrome, a condition affecting sexual development. Yet, this condition’s physical effects are extensive, and there is already documentary evidence suggesting Hitler had undescended testicles. Thus, history proves more enlightening than genetics.

Additionally, the broader question this documentary raises is whether Hitler was uniquely evil or entirely accountable for World War II and the Holocaust. Unfortunately, history reveals that genocidal dictators do not operate in isolation; they need the backing of numerous individuals.

Millions supported Hitler, other politicians enacted laws enabling his rise, and many authorities aided in enforcing the racist legislations that resulted in the Holocaust. We shouldn’t search within our genes for reasons why so many opt to become dictators; the pressing issue lies in why we allow them to do so.