News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
This is what is known as scientific racism. The US has always been the world's #1 producer or it
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_racism
Sickle Cell Anemia: This is more common in individuals of African, Mediterranean, Middle Eastern, and Indian descent. The condition is caused by an inherited defect in hemoglobin, which affects red blood cells and can cause pain and other serious complications.
Cystic Fibrosis: This genetic disorder is more common in people of European descent, especially those with Northern or Central European ancestry. It affects the lungs, digestive system, and other organs.
Hypertension (High Blood Pressure): Hypertension is more prevalent in Black Americans than in other racial groups. The reasons for this are multifactorial, including genetics, socioeconomic status, and environmental factors. African Americans are also at higher risk for complications from hypertension, such as stroke and kidney disease.
Type 2 Diabetes: This is more common in Native American, Hispanic, and African American populations. Genetic factors play a role, along with lifestyle factors such as diet and physical activity levels.
Lactose Intolerance: People of East Asian, West African, Native American, and Mediterranean descent are more likely to be lactose intolerant, meaning they have difficulty digesting lactose, a sugar found in dairy products. This is due to lower levels of lactase, the enzyme that breaks down lactose.
Breast Cancer: While breast cancer affects women of all races, African American women are more likely to develop certain aggressive forms of breast cancer, such as triple-negative breast cancer, which tends to have a poorer prognosis. On the other hand, white women are more likely to be diagnosed with breast cancer at an earlier age.
Prostate Cancer: Prostate cancer is more common in Black men, who are also more likely to be diagnosed at a younger age and experience more aggressive forms of the disease.
Asthma: Asthma is more prevalent among Black and Hispanic children in the United States. Environmental factors, such as exposure to air pollution, and socioeconomic factors, like access to healthcare, contribute to these disparities.
Skin Cancer (Melanoma): While melanoma is more common in people with lighter skin, such as those of European descent, it tends to be diagnosed at a later stage in people with darker skin, such as Black and Hispanic individuals, due to lower awareness and delayed diagnosis.
Thalassemia: A blood disorder more common in individuals of Mediterranean, African, or Southeast Asian descent. It involves the body making an abnormal form of hemoglobin, leading to anemia.
Tay-Sachs Disease: This genetic disorder, which leads to the progressive destruction of nerve cells in the brain and spinal cord, is more common in Ashkenazi Jewish individuals but also affects people of French-Canadian, Cajun, or certain Eastern European origins.
This is pretty disingenuous, the vast majority of sickle cell cases are non-hispanic blacks. Hispanics and whites also get sickle cell. If you're grouping all those ethnicities in there, you might as well include whites too.
First of all, you are confusing ethnicity and race. Second, most of your examples are entirely caused by social factors.
That's a nice list of red herrings. Those are all facts supported by evidence gathered through research. The point of the article is that RFK Jr has made, and continues to make, claims of fact that have no evidentiary basis, and in many cases directly contradict the available evidence.
Then why did Hobbes_Dent complain the list didn't have enough examples of Caucasian issues?
I don't care, and neither should anyone else. The fact that there are genetic propensities for disease that are more prevalent among ethnic groups is not relevant to the substance of the article.
It's also expected, that's how separate populations of a species tend to behave. See things such as hair color, eye color, ability to digest lactose far into adulthood ect. The fact these differences exist doesn't mean you can make random claims with no evidence, or in spite of the evidence. That last one is called lying for those in the back.
What's your point? If you read the article, the point is that the data doesn't support his claim. Nobody us claiming that race can't have an affect on how people respond to diseases. Honestly tho, you're more likely to see differences from individual to individual. This is why we do double blind studies with placebo.
I think their point is not to conflate scientific racism with the actual medical needs of different ethnic backgrounds. Nor to conflate either with scientific misinterpretation, or plain immorality, which is more what Kennedy is advocating for.
The author of the study sums it up quite nicely: the results of this study so not support inequitable vaccination. If we just claim Kennedy is trying to sort humans into different subspecies, that's just going to muddy the argument that his stance is wrong and immoral.
From Wikipedia:
From the article:
Not at all what the article or Wikipedia is referring to, but you do you.
So nothing regarding RFK's ideas about black people and immune response or pain sensitivity?
You are correct.
And what, pray tell, is the use case for this information
General application is that your test groups should be diverse
Not related to RKF jr thinking black people shouldn’t receive medical care so I don’t know why it’s brought up
How dare you come in here with your facts. These people need to be angry about scientific racism!
Next you're gonna tell me that because I have blue eyes that I am much more sensitive to bright lights than someone with darker colored eyes. You're just eye racist!
Nah, the problem is extrapolating that into "dark eyes don't need sunglasses".
... I never said that? I said blue eyes are more light sensitive than darker eyes. This is verifiably true.
Everyone should have polarized sun glasses, but the level of discomfort someone with blue eyes and someone with brown eyes will have while dealing with the same sunny conditions will be quite different. I have very light blue eyes. Some have called them "icey". I cannot deal with pretty much any sunlight and I can also have reflections trigger horrible migraines. It's well documented that lighter colored eyes tend to struggle more often with brightness levels. Kinda like how putting some dark paint on your upper cheeks helps significantly while working outside as it cuts down on the light being bounced into your own eyes by your cheeks.
The problem is that RFK is essentially saying that, not that you said it. Genetic differences shouldn't be used as a "reason" to deny people proper medical care.
...and you think generic differences should be a reason to deny people proper medical care?
Am I misunderstanding your comment? I have a bit of a headache right now and I feel like I am reading your comment wrong. Please clarify.
Your example of blue eyes not being scientific racism came across as defending RFK's stance, so my apologies if I misread. I am against denying care to anybody for any reason.
Boy now I feel all turned around.
I'll just clarify my stance I guess. I think it's important to consider how someone's race or genetics can alter their medical needs or risks, but I don't think those genetics should be used to deny medical care. I do think it should be taken into consideration by their doctor though. Just like families have predisposed medical conditions some people are going to have a higher likelihood of certain things due to their race or ethnicity and it's important that doctors take those things into consideration. Kinda like how we shouldn't be using the same exact medical standards for both men and women. They have differences and they need to be considered at all points during care.
I generally agree then. Personally, I feel like we should focus more on individualized care needs and not so much on demographics, since differences between individuals are far greater than differences between demographics. Good doctors already allow personal needs to override any demographic-based assumptions, but it's still unfortunately common to find bias in medicine.
The difference in gender care still upset me a ton. Multiple ex girlfriends have told me that their doctors and even the nurses don't take their comments or requests seriously unless a guy (me in that case) is around to repeat it. Which is obviously totally fucking bullshit.
My mom was denied painkillers until her boyfriend demanded them for her.
I have legitimately heard doctors say "you know how women are, always so dramatic". Like bitch I am 5'11" and 280 pounds, but I will cry like a baby if I have to get shots. I hate needles. Men can be dramatic too haha.
Where are the facts about Caucasian propensities for disease and genetic issues in the list? Partial points for the light skin point.
Incomplete facts. Science huh.
Anything to justify it.
Cystic Fibrosis was listed.
There are genetic diseases more common in each (previously isolated) population. It's a fact which can be used to target screenings in a way that minimizes residual risks.
Many things in the list are different for socioeconomic reasons as well as genetic reasons. That doesn't mean the genetic differences don't exist or that scientific racism is behind them.
Racism is when you treat individuals not according to their own characteristics, but the characteristics (correctly assessed or not) attributed to their race. But public health efforts are not about individuals and often need to use racial background to help provide the care most likely to succeed.
Personal genomics will help us move to more individualized medicine, but it's not ready or affordable enough to apply to every case at the moment.
And if you think the gaggle of idiots running the country right now (up to and including RFK Jr.) has any intent to make personal genomics affordable to anyone but themselves, I've got a fucking bridge to sell you.
I do not. I don't trust RFK Jr to do anything right except possibly by accident.
Just reinforcing the point that there are legitimate and non-racist uses of race information in medicine.
Edit: Keep in mind that the comment I replied too seemed to take issue with a list of conditions related to genetics that have different propensities in different races. There are racists like Kennedy on the one side and then there are idiots on the other who think that any credence given to nature over nurture is indicative of racism and could not possibly be backed by objective facts.