25 ms·

I don’t know if I’d describe it as disingenuous because perhaps the parent commenter sincerely believes what they said… …but it is a ridiculous comment. There’

I don’t know if I’d describe it as disingenuous because perhaps the parent commenter sincerely believes what they said… …but it is a ridiculous comment. There’s dozens of examples where women are disadvantaged and mistreated by healthcare systems all over the world, in ways that men don’t experience. Study after study has shown that black women are especially vulnerable to a disregard for their pain, so much so, black women have a much higher risk of death during childbirth! I can buy in to someone being concerned about testosterone levels and the impact it’s having on men, it’s totally fair and valid, but to suggest that this is an example of men being mistreated by the healthcare system and that the healthcare system prioritises women over men doesn’t stand up to any scrutiny. Fertility is actually a fantastic example where women are disadvantaged compared to men. Consider how harmful birth control can be, consider how menopause can be an awful experience with very little medical support available. Ask a woman how easy it is to get a hysterectomy, or their tubes tied, ask a woman how they’re treated when getting a birth control implant…

trafficante 4y ago
> black women have a much higher risk of death during childbirth Found the NY Times reader. Fwiw, that article takes a somewhat flawed study [1] and decides the only possible explanation for wealthy(!!) black women dying in childbirth at a higher rate is systemic white racism. It then compares white vs black rates of infant mortality, also chalking that up to so-called ”white supremacist culture”, except the research study clearly shows both Asians and Hispanics having lower infant mortality rates than whites. To give the NYT the absolute smallest bit of credit, they do briefly admit to this way down the article. Differences in group outcomes always have to be racism/bias and can never be a result of any biological/cultural differences. Can’t discuss obesity rates, prevalence of hypertensive diseases, Vitamin D deficiency being heavily correlated with low birth weights [2] and black mothers being SIX TIMES more likely to be Vitamin D deficient at birth compared to white mothers [3] - you apparently aren’t even allowed to control for age! And thus the NY Times tells its unquestioning readers that Systemic White Supremacy is literally killing rich black women and also mysteriously elevating the Superior Asian Baby high above the rest. It’s nonsensical post-truth garbage that would be laughable if it weren’t being taken seriously and used as part of the rationalization superstructure used to justify increasingly ineffectual and, frankly, dangerous policies. [1] https://matthewgreen.substack.com/p/nyt-article-says-that-landmark-study https://matthewgreen.substack.com/p/nyt-article-says-that-la... [2] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4662754/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4662754/ [3] https://academic.oup.com/jn/article/137/2/447/4664564 https://academic.oup.com/jn/article/137/2/447/4664564
- phphphphp 4y ago
  You've fallen for recency bias. Just because you saw the article in the New York Times today, does not mean I read the same article and based my argument on that. I'm not sure if you're challenging the New York Times article which I am not referencing, or the general belief that black women die more often in childbirth (which has been well established and reported for many, many years -- certainly not a new invention of the New York Times)?
41amxn41 4y ago
Yeah we've been hearing about POOR WAMYN endlessly for the past decade. Let's just stop talking solely about women, because no, they are not the only ones disadvantaged.
lumb63 4y ago
I don't think it's fair of you to characterize my comment as "ridiculous". I'll focus on the US, specifically, since that's where I'm from and is the society I'm most familiar with. I am glad you used the example of black women. Race is irrelevant to the conversation at hand (though I would note, lest I am called insensitive, that black individuals are disadvantaged in health). You're using race to divert attention: your statistic actually compares black vs. white and ignores men vs. women. Why don't you compare men to women, or black men to black women, or white men to white women? Is it maybe because white men (who have the highest life expectancy among men in the US) have a lower life expectancy than white women, all women, and black women [0]? And those men have a 0% risk of death during childbirth! They're making up for it by having a higher chance of dying than women, every single year of their life, up until age 80, when women outpace them because there are so few men left [1]. When you compare apples to apples, men draw the short end of the stick, in terms of life expectancy at least. And despite the above inequity, if you go to the CDC website and look at death rates, what do you see along the sidebar [2]? "Racism and Health", "Women and Health", "Conversations in Equity", "Health Equity Matters Newsletter". At least the CDC is more interested in helping black people and women than they are men, despite that men have the disadvantage here against both categories statistically, even if they're stacked together, i.e. black women. Research into health does not need to be a black vs. white, women vs. men, issue. There is a lot of work to be done for the common good. But to say that "the healthcare system prioritises women over men doesn't stand up to any scrutiny" is false. Fertility is actually a fantastic example where men are disadvantaged compared to women, at least with respect to birth control. Birth control is harmful. But those who use it, choose to do so. In other words, they think it is best for them, and make that decision. Women have the options of A) not using birth control, being possibly subject to unwanted pregnancy, and not being subject to its harms B) using birth control, avoiding unwanted pregnancy, and being subject to its harms. Men have the options of A) not using birth control, being possibly subject to unwanted pregnancy, and not being subject to its harms B) not using birth control, being possibly subject to unwanted pregnancy, and not being subject to its harms. Note that there are no options. Note that this also does not include the harms to men due to child support payments for children they had no way to prevent. By the time the average woman experiences menopause (age 51 [3]) and has "an awful experience with very little medical support available", 8.2% of men born at the same time have already died, compared to 4.7% for women [4]. During the years surrounding menopause (45-64; I'd like to be more precise, but this is the granularity given to me), men are more than three times as likely to kill themselves [5]. The living men aren't getting the medical support they need, and the extra dead men certainly didn't. We can also talk about other sex-related issues such as breast vs. prostate cancer, if you want. They have similar death rates of 19.6 and 18.8 percent respectively [6, 7], but breast cancer research receives twice the funding of prostate cancer research [8]. Why would this be, if our healthcare system doesn't prioritise women over men? I asserted that nobody cared about the impacts that lower testosterone levels and sperm counts could have with respect to men, based on an article that framed it as a "societal problem" and a "fertility problem", and did not acknowledge any of the challenges this specifically poses to men, which I listed in my original post. I pointed out my opinion that society would respond differently if the issue impacted women. You responded by telling me how black women are more likely to die during childbirth than white women, that a country where women live more than 5 years longer than men [9] prioritises men's health care, and that women are at a disadvantage because they have an option they can choose to reduce their risk of unwanted pregnancy, with health tradeoffs. Please rethink whose comment, yours or mine, is ridiculous. [0]: https://cfpub.epa.gov/roe/indicator.cfm?i=70 https://cfpub.epa.gov/roe/indicator.cfm?i=70 [1]: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/mortality/gmwk310.htm https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/mortality/gmwk310.htm [2]: https://www.cdc.gov/minorityhealth/lcod/men/2018/index.html https://www.cdc.gov/minorityhealth/lcod/men/2018/index.html [3]: https://www.everydayhealth.com/menopause/at-what-age-will-you-enter-menopause.aspx https://www.everydayhealth.com/menopause/at-what-age-will-yo... [4]: https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/table4c6.html https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/table4c6.html [5]: https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/statistics/suicide https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/statistics/suicide [6]: https://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/breast.html https://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/breast.html [7]: https://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/prost.html https://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/prost.html [8]: https://www.cancer.gov/about-nci/budget/fact-book/data/research-funding https://www.cancer.gov/about-nci/budget/fact-book/data/resea... [9]: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/vsrr/VSRR10-508.pdf https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/vsrr/VSRR10-508.pdf

trafficante 4y ago

> black women have a much higher risk of death during childbirth Found the NY Times reader. Fwiw, that article takes a somewhat flawed study [1] and decides the only possible explanation for wealthy(!!) black women dying in childbirth at a higher rate is systemic white racism. It then compares white vs black rates of infant mortality, also chalking that up to so-called ”white supremacist culture”, except the research study clearly shows both Asians and Hispanics having lower infant mortality rates than whites. To give the NYT the absolute smallest bit of credit, they do briefly admit to this way down the article. Differences in group outcomes always have to be racism/bias and can never be a result of any biological/cultural differences. Can’t discuss obesity rates, prevalence of hypertensive diseases, Vitamin D deficiency being heavily correlated with low birth weights [2] and black mothers being SIX TIMES more likely to be Vitamin D deficient at birth compared to white mothers [3] - you apparently aren’t even allowed to control for age! And thus the NY Times tells its unquestioning readers that Systemic White Supremacy is literally killing rich black women and also mysteriously elevating the Superior Asian Baby high above the rest. It’s nonsensical post-truth garbage that would be laughable if it weren’t being taken seriously and used as part of the rationalization superstructure used to justify increasingly ineffectual and, frankly, dangerous policies. [1] https://matthewgreen.substack.com/p/nyt-article-says-that-landmark-study https://matthewgreen.substack.com/p/nyt-article-says-that-la... [2] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4662754/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4662754/ [3] https://academic.oup.com/jn/article/137/2/447/4664564 https://academic.oup.com/jn/article/137/2/447/4664564

phphphphp 4y ago
You've fallen for recency bias. Just because you saw the article in the New York Times today, does not mean I read the same article and based my argument on that. I'm not sure if you're challenging the New York Times article which I am not referencing, or the general belief that black women die more often in childbirth (which has been well established and reported for many, many years -- certainly not a new invention of the New York Times)?

41amxn41 4y ago

Yeah we've been hearing about POOR WAMYN endlessly for the past decade. Let's just stop talking solely about women, because no, they are not the only ones disadvantaged.

lumb63 4y ago

I don't think it's fair of you to characterize my comment as "ridiculous". I'll focus on the US, specifically, since that's where I'm from and is the society I'm most familiar with. I am glad you used the example of black women. Race is irrelevant to the conversation at hand (though I would note, lest I am called insensitive, that black individuals are disadvantaged in health). You're using race to divert attention: your statistic actually compares black vs. white and ignores men vs. women. Why don't you compare men to women, or black men to black women, or white men to white women? Is it maybe because white men (who have the highest life expectancy among men in the US) have a lower life expectancy than white women, all women, and black women [0]? And those men have a 0% risk of death during childbirth! They're making up for it by having a higher chance of dying than women, every single year of their life, up until age 80, when women outpace them because there are so few men left [1]. When you compare apples to apples, men draw the short end of the stick, in terms of life expectancy at least. And despite the above inequity, if you go to the CDC website and look at death rates, what do you see along the sidebar [2]? "Racism and Health", "Women and Health", "Conversations in Equity", "Health Equity Matters Newsletter". At least the CDC is more interested in helping black people and women than they are men, despite that men have the disadvantage here against both categories statistically, even if they're stacked together, i.e. black women. Research into health does not need to be a black vs. white, women vs. men, issue. There is a lot of work to be done for the common good. But to say that "the healthcare system prioritises women over men doesn't stand up to any scrutiny" is false. Fertility is actually a fantastic example where men are disadvantaged compared to women, at least with respect to birth control. Birth control is harmful. But those who use it, choose to do so. In other words, they think it is best for them, and make that decision. Women have the options of A) not using birth control, being possibly subject to unwanted pregnancy, and not being subject to its harms B) using birth control, avoiding unwanted pregnancy, and being subject to its harms. Men have the options of A) not using birth control, being possibly subject to unwanted pregnancy, and not being subject to its harms B) not using birth control, being possibly subject to unwanted pregnancy, and not being subject to its harms. Note that there are no options. Note that this also does not include the harms to men due to child support payments for children they had no way to prevent. By the time the average woman experiences menopause (age 51 [3]) and has "an awful experience with very little medical support available", 8.2% of men born at the same time have already died, compared to 4.7% for women [4]. During the years surrounding menopause (45-64; I'd like to be more precise, but this is the granularity given to me), men are more than three times as likely to kill themselves [5]. The living men aren't getting the medical support they need, and the extra dead men certainly didn't. We can also talk about other sex-related issues such as breast vs. prostate cancer, if you want. They have similar death rates of 19.6 and 18.8 percent respectively [6, 7], but breast cancer research receives twice the funding of prostate cancer research [8]. Why would this be, if our healthcare system doesn't prioritise women over men? I asserted that nobody cared about the impacts that lower testosterone levels and sperm counts could have with respect to men, based on an article that framed it as a "societal problem" and a "fertility problem", and did not acknowledge any of the challenges this specifically poses to men, which I listed in my original post. I pointed out my opinion that society would respond differently if the issue impacted women. You responded by telling me how black women are more likely to die during childbirth than white women, that a country where women live more than 5 years longer than men [9] prioritises men's health care, and that women are at a disadvantage because they have an option they can choose to reduce their risk of unwanted pregnancy, with health tradeoffs. Please rethink whose comment, yours or mine, is ridiculous. [0]: https://cfpub.epa.gov/roe/indicator.cfm?i=70 https://cfpub.epa.gov/roe/indicator.cfm?i=70 [1]: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/mortality/gmwk310.htm https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/mortality/gmwk310.htm [2]: https://www.cdc.gov/minorityhealth/lcod/men/2018/index.html https://www.cdc.gov/minorityhealth/lcod/men/2018/index.html [3]: https://www.everydayhealth.com/menopause/at-what-age-will-you-enter-menopause.aspx https://www.everydayhealth.com/menopause/at-what-age-will-yo... [4]: https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/table4c6.html https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/table4c6.html [5]: https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/statistics/suicide https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/statistics/suicide [6]: https://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/breast.html https://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/breast.html [7]: https://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/prost.html https://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/prost.html [8]: https://www.cancer.gov/about-nci/budget/fact-book/data/research-funding https://www.cancer.gov/about-nci/budget/fact-book/data/resea... [9]: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/vsrr/VSRR10-508.pdf https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/vsrr/VSRR10-508.pdf