4 ms·

yea, maybe we could call people cream and chocolate. I'd be onboard with that.

by bongoman37 6y ago

josteink 6y ago
We could call people ... people? Do they have to be black or white?
- slver 6y ago
  "People are at higher risk of vitamin D deficiency compared to people." Race is not something to necessarily hide.
  - Mordisquitos 6y ago
    "People with darker skin are at higher risk of vitamin D deficiency compared to people with lighter skin." This sentence is more accurate and useful than the alternative based on the socially constructed ideas of "black" or "white" people. There is no need to "hide" race, as there is no such thing.
    - slver 6y ago
      "Darker" and "lighter" are relative terms said relative to no one, maybe some unknown average. Also people with darker skin due to lots of UV exposure are at LOWER risk of vitamin D deficiency than your average pale skinned person. So it comes down to genetics. Like it or not. Facts of life. To say there's "no such thing" as race is incredibly, you know, post-factual. Might as well decide there's "no such thing as sex", just half of humanity is inexplicably infertile. In medicine you don't get everyone's legs preventively amputated because maybe some people have problems with their legs. In the same way we can't just amputate our dictionary and minds of useful concepts and knowledge like the idea of race, just because some people have problematic interpretations of race.
      - Mordisquitos 6y ago
        The use of relative terms is clear when used in the same sentence, and there is no need for an implied average. Taller people are more likely to reach higher shelves than shorter people. Richer people are more likely to own a car than poorer people. Older people are more likely to have had children than younger people. None of those sentences need an artificial human category to make their meaning clear. Also, I don't know what point you're trying to make by implying different base conditions. A "black" person who likes to sunbathe in their garden is also at lower risk of vitamin D deficiency than a "white" person who never leaves their basement. So what? And surely you're aware that at higher latitudes "white" people with darker skin are at greater risk than lighter-skinned "white" people? And "black" people with lighter skin are at lower risk than "black" people with darker skin? Of course it's down to genetics—at no point have I implied otherwise. The variance in baseline melanin is of course genetic! But, like it or not, "a characteristic is genetic" does not mean "races are real". I suggest you catch up on the subject of human population genetics. There is no such thing as human race in the biological consensus. Rather, it is an arbitrary social construct present mostly in Western and especially American society, which doesn't even have consistent interpretations across regions or populations.
        username90 6y ago
        > There is no such thing as human race in the biological consensus There is. There is however no clear way to create a line saying "here one race ends and the other race begins", there is a continuous spectrum between Europeans and Africans and Asians. So the way USA tries to put you in discrete bins like "White", "Black", "Latino", "Asian" is unscientific, but the concept that humans whose ancestors came from different parts of the world are different enough for them to be considered separate races is not. Technically there are more races of humans in Africa than outside Africa since it is so diverse, but USA still groups all of them as "black", its just pure nonsense what they are doing.
        slver 6y ago
        > But, like it or not, "a characteristic is genetic" does not mean "races are real". I suggest you catch up on the subject of human population genetics. I mean, that's literally the definition of a race: "a population within a species that is distinct in some way, especially a subspecies". I'm not sure arguing whether a concept is real or not real makes sense. If a concept can be clearly defined, it's "real".
  - ampdepolymerase 6y ago
    Aladeen is at a higher risk of vitamin D compared to Aladeen.

yea, maybe we could call people cream and chocolate. I'd be onboard with that.

josteink 6y ago

We could call people ... people? Do they have to be black or white?

slver 6y ago
"People are at higher risk of vitamin D deficiency compared to people." Race is not something to necessarily hide.
- Mordisquitos 6y ago
  "People with darker skin are at higher risk of vitamin D deficiency compared to people with lighter skin." This sentence is more accurate and useful than the alternative based on the socially constructed ideas of "black" or "white" people. There is no need to "hide" race, as there is no such thing.
  - slver 6y ago
    "Darker" and "lighter" are relative terms said relative to no one, maybe some unknown average. Also people with darker skin due to lots of UV exposure are at LOWER risk of vitamin D deficiency than your average pale skinned person. So it comes down to genetics. Like it or not. Facts of life. To say there's "no such thing" as race is incredibly, you know, post-factual. Might as well decide there's "no such thing as sex", just half of humanity is inexplicably infertile. In medicine you don't get everyone's legs preventively amputated because maybe some people have problems with their legs. In the same way we can't just amputate our dictionary and minds of useful concepts and knowledge like the idea of race, just because some people have problematic interpretations of race.
    - Mordisquitos 6y ago
      The use of relative terms is clear when used in the same sentence, and there is no need for an implied average. Taller people are more likely to reach higher shelves than shorter people. Richer people are more likely to own a car than poorer people. Older people are more likely to have had children than younger people. None of those sentences need an artificial human category to make their meaning clear. Also, I don't know what point you're trying to make by implying different base conditions. A "black" person who likes to sunbathe in their garden is also at lower risk of vitamin D deficiency than a "white" person who never leaves their basement. So what? And surely you're aware that at higher latitudes "white" people with darker skin are at greater risk than lighter-skinned "white" people? And "black" people with lighter skin are at lower risk than "black" people with darker skin? Of course it's down to genetics—at no point have I implied otherwise. The variance in baseline melanin is of course genetic! But, like it or not, "a characteristic is genetic" does not mean "races are real". I suggest you catch up on the subject of human population genetics. There is no such thing as human race in the biological consensus. Rather, it is an arbitrary social construct present mostly in Western and especially American society, which doesn't even have consistent interpretations across regions or populations.
      - username90 6y ago
        > There is no such thing as human race in the biological consensus There is. There is however no clear way to create a line saying "here one race ends and the other race begins", there is a continuous spectrum between Europeans and Africans and Asians. So the way USA tries to put you in discrete bins like "White", "Black", "Latino", "Asian" is unscientific, but the concept that humans whose ancestors came from different parts of the world are different enough for them to be considered separate races is not. Technically there are more races of humans in Africa than outside Africa since it is so diverse, but USA still groups all of them as "black", its just pure nonsense what they are doing.
      - slver 6y ago
        > But, like it or not, "a characteristic is genetic" does not mean "races are real". I suggest you catch up on the subject of human population genetics. I mean, that's literally the definition of a race: "a population within a species that is distinct in some way, especially a subspecies". I'm not sure arguing whether a concept is real or not real makes sense. If a concept can be clearly defined, it's "real".
- ampdepolymerase 6y ago
  Aladeen is at a higher risk of vitamin D compared to Aladeen.