“Anaemia is not equally distributed by ‘race,’” the Lancet asserted, and rich and poor soils “are a metaphor for structural racism, which results in differential access to the goods, services, and opportunities of society by ‘race.’”
The “disparity in iron deficiency anaemia by place and ‘race’ is a biological indicator of the differential access to goods, services, and opportunities,” it declared, and differential access “to a healthy diet, education, and a clean environment are compounded by differential exposure to infections, poverty, and stress, and differential access to health care, particularly for heavy menstrual bleeding.”
Due to “the patriarchal taboo surrounding menstruation,” it argues, “many women do not receive effective care for heavy menstrual bleeding.”
Curiously for a medical journal, the article spends little time delving into the real biological and genetic factors behind different rates of anemia among blacks and whites.
The American Journal of Epidemiology, for example, found in 2009 that anemia was 3.3 times more common in blacks than whites, even “after adjusting for demographic variables, socioeconomic factors, and comorbid conditions.”
Moreover, sickle cell anemia (SCA), a genetic condition that affects red blood cells, can affect anyone but black people are at a higher genetic risk for the disease, which has nothing to do with “structural racism” or any other sociological construct.
Undeterred in its crusade to pin anemia on racism, the Lancet alleges that differences in anemia between black and white populations “have conventionally and mistakenly been understood in medicine as inherent biological differences between ‘races.’”
“The failure to recognise the racism underpinning differences in anaemia by ‘race’ manifests as a stubborn intergenerational disadvantage that demands our urgent attention,” it concludes.
Doctors. The least trustworthy professionals on the planet.
Moreover, sickle cell anemia (SCA), a genetic condition that affects red blood cells, can affect anyone but black people are at a higher genetic risk for the disease, which has nothing to do with “structural racism” or any other sociological construct.
SCA lessens the morbidity of Malaria. That's why SCA is found in black populations more than white ones, because white populations don't live in areas with Malaria as much as black populations do. It serves as a survival tool, antithetical as that sounds.
Doctors. The least trustworthy professionals on the planet.
Complete hacks, snake oil salesmen, or at least complicit in allowing their profession to get taken over. I know good doctors who don't agree with this nonsense and are non-leftist normal people. But like a lot of us they just want to do their job and not get involved in anything controversial. Those who work at hospitals or in research are especially careful about not doing anything to get themselves in hot water with the establishment.
I vehemently disagree with how they run their profession (and I'm intimately familiar with it), but I disagree with the quoted assertion.
You'll get cheated more often by, eg, contractors. Lawyers are scummier ideologically. Computer programmers can be counted upon to hoard data about you. (Gotta throw myself in there somewhere).
Think about it this way: People who go to the doctor are healthier than people who don't. All other things being equal. It's just difficult/expensive to get what you need.
Doctors. The least trustworthy professionals on the planet.
SCA lessens the morbidity of Malaria. That's why SCA is found in black populations more than white ones, because white populations don't live in areas with Malaria as much as black populations do. It serves as a survival tool, antithetical as that sounds.
SCA is less lethal than mosquitos.
A good justification to genocide those fuckers.
Mosquitos? I am for TMD.
Complete hacks, snake oil salesmen, or at least complicit in allowing their profession to get taken over. I know good doctors who don't agree with this nonsense and are non-leftist normal people. But like a lot of us they just want to do their job and not get involved in anything controversial. Those who work at hospitals or in research are especially careful about not doing anything to get themselves in hot water with the establishment.
I vehemently disagree with how they run their profession (and I'm intimately familiar with it), but I disagree with the quoted assertion.
You'll get cheated more often by, eg, contractors. Lawyers are scummier ideologically. Computer programmers can be counted upon to hoard data about you. (Gotta throw myself in there somewhere).
Think about it this way: People who go to the doctor are healthier than people who don't. All other things being equal. It's just difficult/expensive to get what you need.
Medical error is the third most common cause of death in the United States.
Yeah if you need help it's hard, and making an error can result in death. News at 11. Most people spend the end of their life in a hospital.
Journalists would say that's fake news