Medical Lysenkoism

[Occam's Banana]

[RELATED: Critical Theory threads]

The Dawn of Medical Lysenkoism

The New Discourses Podcast with James Lindsay, Episode 28

The agriculturalist Trofim Lysenko should be a household name throughout the world in roughly the same way that Adolf Hitler, Josef Stalin, and Mao Zedong are or should be. That is, Lysenko shouldn't be known for his successes, which are none of his legacy, but for his catastrophic failure. He was the agriculturalist of the Soviet Union, first under Stalin, and his ideological biology (Lysenkoism) led directly to the deaths of tens of millions, first in the Soviet Union and then in Maoist China. Lysenkoism implied famine and mass death, and disputing Lysenkoism, despite its catastrophe, meant a trip to the gulag or a bullet in your head.

We should be aware of Lysenko because it is crucially important to understand how the ideological perversion of science, especially the biological sciences, can lead to catastrophes. In fact, if we were more aware of Trofim Lysenko and his legacy of death, we might be more cognizant of the threat we're currently stumbling our way into under the banners of "antiracist medicine" and "health equity." These are the dawn of Medical Lysenkoism, which is a tragedy in the making, potentially on a grand scale, and this is already well underway.

The threat of Medical Lysenkoism is rapidly growing around us already, and we have to take it seriously and demand it be put to a halt. In this case, Critical Race Theory and its perverse doctrines of "antiracism" and "equity" are being leveraged to transform healthcare away from a science- and patient-oriented endeavor to an activist opportunity to "level the playing field." Further, under the banner of "health equity" and Covid-19, our society's concerning lurch toward medical dictatorship (governed by this new "equitable" Medical Lysenkoism) is becoming the standard throughout our medical schools, hospitals, and research universities. This is a preventable catastrophe in the making.

In this episode of the New Discourses Podcast, join James Lindsay as he reads through a recent essay (https://bostonreview.net/science-na...wey-michelle-morse-antiracist-agenda-medicine​) published in Boston Review outlining an advance in the "health equity" agenda wherein even racially preferential care is described as already being implemented and reparations are demanded at a major Boston-area teaching hospital affiliated with Harvard University.

https://odysee.com/@newdiscourses:9/the-dawn-of-medical-lysenkoism:c

 

[Occam's Banana]

Thread: Boston hospital launches priority medical service to coloreds, whites to wait.

That's in addition to cash payouts as reparations, among other things.

An Antiracist Agenda for Medicine

https://bostonreview.net/science-na...wey-michelle-morse-antiracist-agenda-medicine

Colorblind solutions have failed to achieve racial equity in health care. We need both federal reparations and real institutional accountability.

Bram Wispelwey, Michelle Morse

<snip, I'll save you the sodomite's ramblings who wrote this and cut to the chase, the program being started this year at one of the biggest hospitals in the country>

For both of these reasons, we believe antiracist institutional change is essential to supplement federal reparations. If we are serious about achieving equity—both now and after federal reparations are paid—we must also pursue institutional action. Crucial to this work is a pragmatic orientation to what philosopher Naomi Zack calls “applicative justice”—“applying justice to those who don’t now receive it”—as opposed to more idealistic conceptions of justice, whether derived from John Rawls or John Locke, on which some arguments for reparations are based.

This is exactly what we have tried to achieve in the design our new pilot initiative at Brigham and Women’s Hospital set to launch later this spring. Adapting Darity’s reparations framework of acknowledgment, redress, and closure (ARC) to an institutional level, we have designed a program—we call it a Healing ARC—with initiatives for all three components. Each centers Black and Latinx patients and community members: those most impacted by unjust heart failure management and under whose direction appropriate restitution can begin to take shape.

Acknowledgment

As Darity explains it, acknowledgment “involves recognition and admission of the wrong by the perpetrators or beneficiaries of the injustice.” In our case, we take acknowledgment to entail informing patients about our heart failure findings at our hospital, claiming responsibility, and incorporating community ideas for redress. To this end, we are assembling focus groups from five priority communities, the neighborhoods with some of the highest populations of Black and Latinx residents in the city of Boston, to explain our findings, listen to responses and suggestions, and offer a space to discuss a just path forward. These focus groups will ensure that community oversight is an integral component of the program. We are also recruiting heart failure patients, who are intimately familiar with the hospital’s admission process and the intricacies of inpatient and outpatient care, to participate as co-collaborators. Providers will acknowledge our heart failure inequities at relevant points of entry into care, ensuring patients are aware of this history and what is being done to address it.

Redress

Redress is simultaneously the most substantial and the most unprecedented component of our Healing ARC. In general, institutional redress should involve not just a direct solution to monitor and end health inequities but to offer restitution for past and present injustices.

Redress could take multiple forms, from cash transfers and discounted or free care to taxes on nonprofit hospitals that exclude patients of color and race-explicit protocol changes (such as preferentially admitting patients historically denied access to certain forms of medical care).

Crucial to this work is a pragmatic orientation to what philosopher Naomi Zack calls “applicative justice”—“applying justice to those who don’t now receive it.”

The case for redress is particularly urgent for academic medical centers such as our hospital. Because they receive enormous amounts of public funding through federal grants, non-profit tax-exempt status, and Medicare and Medicaid payments, among others, legal scholars have convincingly argued they have a special legal obligation to ensure equitable outcomes under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Even as academic medical centers increasingly attempt to bring their rhetoric and “antiracist” declarations in line with that of racial justice activists, their business plans pivot away from the material reckoning that is necessary to address racial health inequities.

Shawn Johnson and Ayotomiwa Ojo offer a sharp analysis that zeroes in on some of the racist business practices of academic medical centers that Bell would surely recognize as “so-called neutral standards to continue exclusionary practices.” Through aggressive profit-seeking, these institutions prioritize high-profit margin and privately insured patients, contributing to the de facto segregation that lands 50 percent of elderly Black patients in just 5 percent of all hospitals. In 2008 a Bronx coalition filed a civil rights complaint against three academic medical centers in New York as a result of this medical apartheid, although no remedial action resulted, and the problem persists largely unchallenged.

Sensitive to these injustices, we have taken redress in our particular initiative to mean providing precisely what was denied for at least a decade: a preferential admission option for Black and Latinx heart failure patients to our specialty cardiology service. The Healing ARC will include a flag in our electronic medical record and admissions system suggesting that providers admit Black and Latinx heart failure patients to cardiology, rather than rely on provider discretion or patient self-advocacy to determine whether they should go to cardiology or general medicine. We will be analyzing the approach closely for the first year to see how well it works in generating equitable admissions. If it does, there will be good reason to continue the practice as a proven implementation measure to achieve equity.

Offering preferential care based on race or ethnicity may elicit legal challenges from our system of colorblind law. But given the ample current evidence that our health, judicial, and other systems already unfairly preference people who are white, we believe—following the ethical framework of Zack and others—that our approach is corrective and therefore mandated. We encourage other institutions to proceed confidently on behalf of equity and racial justice, with backing provided by recent White House executive orders.

Closure

To complete the Healing ARC with closure, community and patient stakeholders and institutional representatives must agree that the institutional debt has been paid and that a new system is in place to ensure that the problem will not reemerge. The point at which restitution is adequate for the debt incurred will be determined in conversation with community groups. But ensuring the inequity does not recur will require regular data monitoring and community updates. We believe this transparency is essential to establish institutional trustworthiness.

 

[Occam's Banana]

https://twitter.com/aaronsibarium/status/1384497266900279296

 

[Danke]

The Dawn of Medical Lysenkoism

The New Discourses Podcast with James Lindsay, Episode 28

The agriculturalist Trofim Lysenko should be a household name throughout the world in roughly the same way that Adolf Hitler, Josef Stalin, and Mao Zedong are or should be. That is, Lysenko shouldn't be known for his successes, which are none of his legacy, but for his catastrophic failure. He was the agriculturalist of the Soviet Union, first under Stalin, and his ideological biology (Lysenkoism) led directly to the deaths of tens of millions, first in the Soviet Union and then in Maoist China. Lysenkoism implied famine and mass death, and disputing Lysenkoism, despite its catastrophe, meant a trip to the gulag or a bullet in your head.

We should be aware of Lysenko because it is crucially important to understand how the ideological perversion of science, especially the biological sciences, can lead to catastrophes. In fact, if we were more aware of Trofim Lysenko and his legacy of death, we might be more cognizant of the threat we're currently stumbling our way into under the banners of "antiracist medicine" and "health equity." These are the dawn of Medical Lysenkoism, which is a tragedy in the making, potentially on a grand scale, and this is already well underway.

The threat of Medical Lysenkoism is rapidly growing around us already, and we have to take it seriously and demand it be put to a halt. In this case, Critical Race Theory and its perverse doctrines of "antiracism" and "equity" are being leveraged to transform healthcare away from a science- and patient-oriented endeavor to an activist opportunity to "level the playing field." Further, under the banner of "health equity" and Covid-19, our society's concerning lurch toward medical dictatorship (governed by this new "equitable" Medical Lysenkoism) is becoming the standard throughout our medical schools, hospitals, and research universities. This is a preventable catastrophe in the making.

In this episode of the New Discourses Podcast, join James Lindsay as he reads through a recent essay (https://bostonreview.net/science-na...wey-michelle-morse-antiracist-agenda-medicine​) published in Boston Review outlining an advance in the "health equity" agenda wherein even racially preferential care is described as already being implemented and reparations are demanded at a major Boston-area teaching hospital affiliated with Harvard University.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZtlEfa4K46I

That YouTube was great. Probably will be removed.

 

[acptulsa]

Racially preferential care.

Why, yes. As the race now less likely to be admitted into these hospitals, I can definitely say I feel safer.

 

[Occam's Banana]

Gender politics can be added to the mix as well:

https://twitter.com/LukeWGoodrich/status/1384596305196900362

 

[Occam's Banana]

https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/1384489498378125312

 

[Occam's Banana]

Washington state is now allowing providers to refuse vaccinations to white people
https://notthebee.com/article/washi...ctors-to-refuse-vaccinations-for-white-people
Joel Abbott (22 April 2021)

We will be told this isn't racism because "equity":

https://twitter.com/jasonrantz/status/1385044326753787907

"If you're a person of color, you can move forward and schedule a vaccine appointment if there is an opening. But if you're white, you are automatically placed on a standby list. This bars you from continuing the process."​

The scheduling software in question is run by one provider, the African American Reach and Teach Health Ministry (AARTH), which says their funding mandate is to "reach people of color."

"The first list, according to [AARTH consultant Twanda Hill], is a waitlist for people of color, should a vaccine appointment open up. If the waitlist is emptied and vaccine availabilities eventually open up, only then will a white person on the standby list be contacted.

This policy effectively bars white people from accessing taxpayer funded vaccines set up through the state. Hill argues their system isn't truly exclusionary. A small percentage of white people on the standby list make it through. She also notes that people who lie about their race won't be turned away."​

The state department of health has reportedly refused "to directly answer whether or not vaccine providers may discriminate on the basis of race."

Another spokesperson for the organization say that they want to "address current inequities and barriers to accessing vaccine, and get the people who are at highest risk vaccinated first while federal vaccine supply remains limited."

The problem with that sCiEnCe is that it doesn't follow the ACTUAL science of who is at risk:

"Under the current process, an older white person with obesity and cancer is at a higher risk than a young and healthy black person. Yet the white Washingtonian would be denied access based exclusively on his skin color at AARTH. Why? Because, according to Mayes, 'dealing with racism is a stressor that is bad for health and life expectancy.'"​

Translation: subjective feelings over scientific fact.

"The [Department of Health] appears to assume that all people of color are poor, thus have inequitable access to vaccines. If you're white, the DOH presumes you to have privilege, thus easy access to vaccines. But the truth is people of all races experience access issues due to their socio-economic status."​

We're playing dangerous games that lead to really bad prizes, y'all.

 

[Anti Globalist]

Guess this means white people will no longer be allowed to have medial attention.

 

[Occam's Banana]

https://twitter.com/DunedainRanger9/status/1386740029230391298

https://twitter.com/mlnphilapa/status/1386371361338273793

https://twitter.com/BrentAWilliams2/status/1386685993852547072

 

[Occam's Banana]

https://twitter.com/ConceptualJames/status/1393309555900227586

https://twitter.com/ConceptualJames/status/1393309635256463361

https://twitter.com/ConceptualJames/status/1393313785851564033

 

[Brian4Liberty]

Unfortunately, I suspect this may be happening already at some major providers.

 

[Occam's Banana]

https://twitter.com/wu_wenyuan/status/1393335926382907393

https://twitter.com/wu_wenyuan/status/1393339726720114689

https://twitter.com/wu_wenyuan/status/1393344668134432770

 

[TheTexan]

"antiracist"

Ya sure ok

 

[TheTexan]

We're playing dangerous games that lead to really bad prizes, y'all.

Shrug. It's gonna have to get worse before it gets better. May as well provoke it into escalation

 

[Occam's Banana]

Shrug. It's gonna have to get worse before it gets better. May as well provoke it into escalation

I agree. And just to be clear, that line you quoted (including the bold emphasis) was from the article, not me - though I agree with it, too.

 

[Occam's Banana]

https://twitter.com/LPMisesCaucus/status/1423352539530080258

 

[Occam's Banana]

https://twitter.com/MythinformedMKE/status/1424051647668445184

 

[Occam's Banana]

Medical Lysenkoism:

Leading TX Doc: 'Prosecute Fauci Criticism As Hate Crime!'

Well-known Baylor University professor of medicine Dr. Peter Hotez published an article last month calling for criticism of Fauci and other scientists of his political persuasion to be prosecuted as a "hate crime." He admonished active pursuit of "far-right anti-science aggression." Also today, Fauci turns the fear up to "11" - warning that the variants are coming, the variants are coming! And Biden Covid Advisor Dr. Osterholm reveals some interesting truths about masking and plexiglass barriers. Finally...Biden to order all active-duty service-members to take the shot. Haven't we seen this before?

 

[Occam's Banana]

Cross-posting @Mach's OP for greater exposure.

These are long articles, but very much worth reading.

See Mach's original thread here: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showth...e-s-Getting-Major-Injections-of-Woke-Ideology

Medicine's Getting Major Injections of Woke Ideology

They are attacking everything, inside and out.

Part 1

Medicine's Getting Major Injections of Woke Ideology

https://www.realclearinvestigations...ll_likely_affect_your_health_care_789077.html

Part 2

As Race 'Equity' Advances in Health Care, Signs of a Chilling Effect on Dissent

https://www.realclearinvestigations...s_of_a_chilling_effect_on_dissent_789529.html

FTA (bold emphasis added): https://www.realclearinvestigations...ll_likely_affect_your_health_care_789077.html

[...]

Rare is the doctor who is willing to publicly question claims of white privilege and implicit bias in the healthcare system, and already several doctors who have publicly pushed back have been demoted and have filed legal actions alleging retaliation. This year the medical profession received an unequivocal message when two editors of the prestigious Journal of the American Medical Association resigned under pressure over a podcast that aired opinions expressing skepticism that the United States is plagued by systemic racism.

[...]

The movement is just beginning reshape the practice of medicine, but a primary assumption is that white doctors and institutions are pervaded with unconscious bias, and that black doctors, who are significantly underrepresented in the profession, would provide better care to black patients. But because black students typically get lower scores and lower grades, increasing the ranks of African American and other minority practitioners would likely require moving away from a reliance on conventional measures of academic qualification, such as undergraduate grades and standardized test scores.

[...]

Efforts to improve health outcomes for black patients are advancing on many fronts. They include a Boston hospital pilot project to offer preferential admissions to non-white patients for heart care; prioritizing non-whites for COVID-19 vaccinations; and the changing of a United States Medical Licensing Examination test from a graded score to pass/fail to help minority students succeed.

The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education is adding a diversity requirement for accrediting U.S. residency and fellowship programs for newly minted doctors; and Northwestern University and its Feinberg School of Medicine are seeking to improve diversity by eliminating a six-decade-old Honors Program in Medical Education.

[...]

“The fundamental problem with social justice in public health is that there are no limiting principles to it,” American Enterprise Institute senior fellow and author Sally Satel wrote in the journal Liberties this year.

“Differences of any kind — in income, education, school performance, and, of course, health — are manifestations of racism and racism alone,” Satel wrote. “The practice of ‘equity,’ the enactment of critical race theory, permits, if not endorses, unequal treatment of the dominant group in order to arrive at equal group outcomes, even if it is to the detriment of ailing individuals.”

Satel is among those who doubt equity is attainable, given the complex underlying factors that shape human health. But some medical ethics experts are pushing in the other direction and going so far as to argue that equalizing group outcomes between blacks and whites may necessitate tolerating a greater loss of life. [i.e., more white people should die in order to "even the score" so that "equity" can be achieved - OB]

Much more (and more details) at original articles - see Mach's post for links.