Any black person could have told you this.
this post was submitted on 17 Dec 2023
96 points (95.3% liked)
News
23415 readers
3816 users here now
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. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. 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.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Well, yeah. The problem is folks don’t listen to us. They might listen to data.
Doubtful. They always know better than those stupid scientists.
In the case of unconscious bias, they probably brush off the data because they don't believe they are a part of the problem. It's those other doctors who are overtly racist that are the problem...
Aren't they both part of the problem? Does it matter if it's unconscious or conscious if either way they aren't getting the medical care they need?
Absolutely, they are both a part of the problem. However the former likely won't recognize they are a part of the problem because of the unconscious nature of their biases. So they won't ignore the data because they don't trust it, or whatever, but they won't recognize how their actions contribute to it.
I think it does…. When we are talking about systemic racism it’s important to note that it is not just white versus black.
For example I remember reading an article that black police officers are more harsh towards black citizens during traffic stops etc.
It’s not just white doctors deciding black folks feel less pain. It’s a systemic issue where we are all doing it too each other, often without even realizing it.
Well when it comes to medicine it's definitely a white vs black thing. Research shows that health outcomes for black patients are better when they are treated by black doctors
Most of the healthcare establishment is very aware of this already. Unfortunately, it does not penetrate the skulls of certain docs.
Nah, people will just twist the data like they always have. Like accusing black people of higher rates of crime and using arrest and conviction data when that are the outcome of a racist system.
It's criminal that so much of the medical profession has this ridiculous idea in their heads that black people are more impervious to pain than white people.
I am by training a theoretical scientist, but I spent a good chunk of my career working on problems in public health and healthcare.
Yes, every black person knows this, as do most health professionals, both in public health and medicine - the latter a lot less so, in my opinion and experience.
Here’s why this study matters:
- This is the British NHS, not US medicine (I know from other studies that we do much worse). Because the NHS is a cohesive healthcare system (despite what they’ve been voting to do lately over there), they have the duty and the ability as an organization to address it. The article mentions programs they’re undertaking and spending hundreds of millions of pounds on. Hopefully this is going to include things like mandatory training and following the data throughout the year with consequences for facilities that do not bring those numbers in line.
- If I was still in active research, I would for sure make use of this report in my own work. One of my major interests is how neurodevelopment and neuroanatomy affect and determine behavior. Those things are directly affected by things like prenatal and postnatal care, physical and emotional stress of the mother, nutrition, and so on. These things in turn affect everything in childhood and adulthood from likelihood to commit violent crimes to likelihood to complete higher education. These problems don’t begin and end at the hospital door, and by using this as one of several pieces of demonstrable and quantitative evidence, we can build off of it to further show the impact and importance of medical disparity. A significant part of my post history is me going into depth on this kind of issue and the implications for things like “criminal justice.”
- The same goes for what would be a followup paper on the neurological and then sociological impacts of systemic racism. Unfortunately, those papers are less likely to be used directly to affect policy but can themselves provide the basis for other studies.
We have so fucking far to go it’s daunting, but we wouldn’t have gotten to where we are if we do not keep pushing.
And Indigenous people. :/
Ethnicity affects all healthcare.
As a white person who had been taken very seriously in an ER about a panic attack (with a history of anxiety no one asked about) I've first hand seen the effects of race in hospitals. I recognize my privilege which shouldn't exist, and the life threatening situations that occur from nurses and doctors who simply don't care enough about their patients terrifies me. If they can simply turn off their care for some, they shouldn't be practicing medicine.
While there very likely are a host of social factors going into racial differences in outcomes, that this relates to stillbirth outcomes means there's another factor that needs to be considered in the mix too.
There was a pretty neat study this year looking at how national Vitamin D fortification programs in the food supply of Finland and Sweden and how those programs correlated with stillbirth before and after: Is there a relation between stillbirth and low levels of vitamin D in the population? A bi-national follow-up study of vitamin D fortification (2023).
Key point:
Our observational data of > 4 million pregnancies show that in two Northern countries with widespread low plasma vitamin D levels (< 50 nmol/l), each increment of national vitamin D food fortification was associated with an approximately 15% reduction in stillbirths.
This is relevant to the above study given the findings in Distribution of vitamin D status in the UK: a cross-sectional analysis of UK Biobank (2021):
Asian (n=4297/8000, 53.7%) and black (n=2459/7046, 34.9%) participants had a higher proportion of vitamin D deficiency than white participants (n=50 920/422 907, 12%).
It's worth noting that the picture is a bit more complicated, as there's studies that indicate that specifically for bone health and cardiovascular health that low Vitamin D serum levels don't necessarily mean deficiency for all populations, so a uniform watermark for deficiency for all people may not be the best approach.
But it's certainly possible that things like viral clearance rates or neonatal health are more dependent on Vitamin D than has been studied up until the past few years and that some of the racial differences between those outcomes (i.e. COVID response or stillbirths) is actually related to the levels of a vitamin that's fairly trivially supplemented.
It's a bit frustrating, as while it's understandable why scientists tend to avoid research focused on racial differences with a 10' pole, the key biological difference between white people and black or Indian people is going to be skin melanin and thus Vitamin D absorption. And in a society that's increasingly indoors and sun avoidant, that may be having serious health consequences on everyone but disproportionately negatively impacting minority communities.
We kind of need to grow the fuck up and be able to maintain both a commitment to decreasing differences in social treatment in medicine while simultaneously being willing to seriously look at biological differences to (a) identify ideal Vitamin D levels for different people with different biological factors and different circumstances (i.e. maternity health may need a different level than other periods of time), and (b) further look at how these differences may be responsible in part for racial disparities in standards of care.
If we only assume social differences and are unwilling to seriously look at other factors, it will lead to years of aimlessly pursuing measures to change outcomes that will continually fail while leaving people vulnerable to factors that can be fixed with something incredibly easy and cheap to improve.
So while the OP study difference in stillbirth outcomes is likely due to multiple factors, a 4x higher rate of potential deficiency in the UK for something linked to double digit decreases in stillbirth rates at each supplementation interval during national supplementation campaigns elsewhere seems like it shouldn't be ignored in thinking about possible ways to help improve outcomes here.
Study took place in the UK, which I found interesting. My own bias would've assumed the NHS would've lessened impacts like these, by nature of its own beuraucracy.