5 ms·

> No European educational institution or government wants to publicise research highlighting that ethnic groups etc This is just not true and sounds like some

> No European educational institution or government wants to publicise research highlighting that ethnic groups etc This is just not true and sounds like some weird dog whistle: https://ambulance.libguides.com/c.php?g=677734&p=4854430 https://ambulance.libguides.com/c.php?g=677734&p=4854430 From there is the following study which concludes “ Greater risk of severe COVID-19 in Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic populations is not explained by cardiometabolic, socioeconomic or behavioural factors, or by 25(OH)-vitamin D status” — so part of the reason this viewpoint isn’t getting more traction is simply that it doesn’t seem to be true https://academic.oup.com/jpubhealth/article/42/3/451/5859581 https://academic.oup.com/jpubhealth/article/42/3/451/5859581 In conclusion: “race realism” requires you to ignore the actual scientific data, as usual.

1234throwaway 6y ago
The parent comment here said publicise, not publish. The studies will go ahead, but you won't see the mainstream media putting this on the front page. The reason is that it's too sensitive. Look at the massive argument and tension that was generated just from someone pointing out that certain skin types are not suited to certain environments (melanin skin to north europe, non-melanin skin to australia) - nobody who values their political or academia career will want to touch this one, so the problem will get worse and worse, silently. It could even end up impacting educational and career outcomes in certain parts of the population that would appear to be racial characteristics because the science impacting those traits is a forbidden subject... which ironically makes people more racist.
- peteretep 6y ago
  “How coronavirus tore through Britain's ethnic minorities” https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-52894225 https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-52894225 “Socio-economic inequality means we're more likely to catch the virus, while our biology means we're more likely to die” Literally just the first link that 10s of Googling found. > from someone point internet out that certain skin types are not suited to certain environments That’s because this is a crassly overloaded dog whistle statement. “Ethnic minorities should supplement Vitamin D in winter” and “pale people should wear sunscreen in Australia” are in no way controversial or sensitive statements in science or academia or in the media. Trying to morph those into an argument that black people “aren’t suited for” Northern Europe is the racist, non-scientific bullshit people lose their positions for.
  - 1234throwaway 6y ago
    But, without the recently invented therapeutics you mentioned (vitamin d supplements, sunscreen), people will have negative health outcomes from living in an environment they are not suited to. There is no need to get emotional here - just accept the scientific and natural fact that in the long term evolution means that people are highly A/B optimised for their environment - there is a reason why in nature there are different ethnicities in different climates Your approach is well intentioned, but it will lead to unnecessary suffering
    - watwut 6y ago
      1.) At this point, it is not "recently invented". It is long term known. 2.) Vitamin D deficiency is affecting you negatively, but not enough to claim that people are "living in an environment they are not suited to". That is absurdly exaggerated claim, especially given all the various reasons why people in history died. 3.) Racism is causing way more suffering then overall vitamin D deficiency.
      - westwing 6y ago
        You're being uncharitable, which is part of the problem. These supplements are "recently invented" in terms of evolutionary history and it's not clear how well they work, compared to actual sun exposure. "Not suited to" may be a contentious choice of words, but "not adapted to" is plain fact. Not being adapted to an environment confers disadvantages. Perhaps these disadvantages are minor, certainly in this case they are not lethal (in isolation), but from a healthcare perspective, they are important to take into consideration. Consider that jumping at every opportunity to scold someone choosing their words unwisely does nothing to actually fight racism, but could indirectly harm those people you are intending to help. After all, why would a true racist care about the health outcomes of the races they ostensibly despise? Why would anyone risk investigating genetic differences in medicine, when the payoff is an accusation of racism by well-meaning but uneducated laymen?
        peteretep 6y ago
- jb775 6y ago
  You won't see the mainstream media publicize any non-vaccine solution because they're in the business of fear-mongering and because they have a chummy relationship with big pharma.
  - detaro 6y ago
    Plenty of mainstream media has reported about the Vitamin D findings.
gfxgirl 6y ago
There's a greater risk in Asians? Japan has had 20k deaths or 1 in 60k, vs USA which is currently at 1 in 1200 People always make up random excuses like "Japan locked down more" No they didn't. In fact they've been practically unlocked since June. "Japan doesn't test as much" That wouldn't hide a raise in the death rate overall. "Japanese people wear masks" Restaurants, coffeeshops, and bars are full (yes, they are) and those people are not wearing masks. They do wear them elsewhere (trains, busses, stores, outside...) In any case, that Asians are of "Greater Risk of severe COVID-19" doesn't seem to fit the facts at least in Japan.
- peteretep 6y ago
  > There's a greater risk in Asians “Asian” in the UK generally means South Asian. Either way you are arguing with the data collected in a study by stating a series of observations about a different country.

1234throwaway 6y ago

The parent comment here said publicise, not publish. The studies will go ahead, but you won't see the mainstream media putting this on the front page. The reason is that it's too sensitive. Look at the massive argument and tension that was generated just from someone pointing out that certain skin types are not suited to certain environments (melanin skin to north europe, non-melanin skin to australia) - nobody who values their political or academia career will want to touch this one, so the problem will get worse and worse, silently. It could even end up impacting educational and career outcomes in certain parts of the population that would appear to be racial characteristics because the science impacting those traits is a forbidden subject... which ironically makes people more racist.

peteretep 6y ago
“How coronavirus tore through Britain's ethnic minorities” https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-52894225 https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-52894225 “Socio-economic inequality means we're more likely to catch the virus, while our biology means we're more likely to die” Literally just the first link that 10s of Googling found. > from someone point internet out that certain skin types are not suited to certain environments That’s because this is a crassly overloaded dog whistle statement. “Ethnic minorities should supplement Vitamin D in winter” and “pale people should wear sunscreen in Australia” are in no way controversial or sensitive statements in science or academia or in the media. Trying to morph those into an argument that black people “aren’t suited for” Northern Europe is the racist, non-scientific bullshit people lose their positions for.
- 1234throwaway 6y ago
  But, without the recently invented therapeutics you mentioned (vitamin d supplements, sunscreen), people will have negative health outcomes from living in an environment they are not suited to. There is no need to get emotional here - just accept the scientific and natural fact that in the long term evolution means that people are highly A/B optimised for their environment - there is a reason why in nature there are different ethnicities in different climates Your approach is well intentioned, but it will lead to unnecessary suffering
  - watwut 6y ago
    1.) At this point, it is not "recently invented". It is long term known. 2.) Vitamin D deficiency is affecting you negatively, but not enough to claim that people are "living in an environment they are not suited to". That is absurdly exaggerated claim, especially given all the various reasons why people in history died. 3.) Racism is causing way more suffering then overall vitamin D deficiency.
    - westwing 6y ago
      You're being uncharitable, which is part of the problem. These supplements are "recently invented" in terms of evolutionary history and it's not clear how well they work, compared to actual sun exposure. "Not suited to" may be a contentious choice of words, but "not adapted to" is plain fact. Not being adapted to an environment confers disadvantages. Perhaps these disadvantages are minor, certainly in this case they are not lethal (in isolation), but from a healthcare perspective, they are important to take into consideration. Consider that jumping at every opportunity to scold someone choosing their words unwisely does nothing to actually fight racism, but could indirectly harm those people you are intending to help. After all, why would a true racist care about the health outcomes of the races they ostensibly despise? Why would anyone risk investigating genetic differences in medicine, when the payoff is an accusation of racism by well-meaning but uneducated laymen?
      - peteretep 6y ago
jb775 6y ago
You won't see the mainstream media publicize any non-vaccine solution because they're in the business of fear-mongering and because they have a chummy relationship with big pharma.
- detaro 6y ago
  Plenty of mainstream media has reported about the Vitamin D findings.

gfxgirl 6y ago

There's a greater risk in Asians? Japan has had 20k deaths or 1 in 60k, vs USA which is currently at 1 in 1200 People always make up random excuses like "Japan locked down more" No they didn't. In fact they've been practically unlocked since June. "Japan doesn't test as much" That wouldn't hide a raise in the death rate overall. "Japanese people wear masks" Restaurants, coffeeshops, and bars are full (yes, they are) and those people are not wearing masks. They do wear them elsewhere (trains, busses, stores, outside...) In any case, that Asians are of "Greater Risk of severe COVID-19" doesn't seem to fit the facts at least in Japan.

peteretep 6y ago
> There's a greater risk in Asians “Asian” in the UK generally means South Asian. Either way you are arguing with the data collected in a study by stating a series of observations about a different country.