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!
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.
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!
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.