3 ms·

You're asking me to provide a recorded observation, as evidence that the people recording "facts" didn't make observations. My theory (as stated) doesn't expect

You're asking me to provide a recorded observation, as evidence that the people recording "facts" didn't make observations. My theory (as stated) doesn't expect that evidence to exist! If this were debate club, that would be a foul. Fortunately for my ELO rating, they did make observations that contradicted their bigotry. Per the great-grandparent: >> In reality, the promise of medical treatment, usually reserved only for emergencies among the rural black population of Macon County, Alabama, was what secured subjects' cooperation in the study. (Racists always do this. Such comorbidities are part of why we have a special name for this special category of "being wrong".)

s1artibartfast 2y ago
>You're asking me to provide a recorded observation, as evidence that the people recording "facts" didn't make observations. My theory doesn't expect that evidence to exist! I Don't understand either if your statements. You said the characterization of Marcon County was obviously wrong, but say there's no possible evidence way they could have known this. >reality, the promise of medical treatment, usually reserved only for emergencies among the rural black population of Macon County, Alabama, was what secured subjects' cooperation in the study What are you trying to say here? Is this bad? They gave medical care to people who wouldn't have it otherwise. Getting Medical Care is a reason people of all Races enroll in clinical trials and it's still true today
- bobthepanda 2y ago
  Normally you need to confirm a stereotype with data, not verify it after the fact. The treatment funding ran out during the study period, so this stopped being a benefit but the study continued anyways.
- wizzwizz4 2y ago
  They had a positive belief. Conventionally, people come to positive beliefs after observing evidence*. I'm accusing them of not doing this. They absolutely could have known better; they simply chose not to look. *: Exception: beliefs about Other Groups of People, which are conventionally formed by looking at Our Group of People, then inventing ways that Other Groups of People are different and/or worse.
  - s1artibartfast 2y ago
    OK, I see what is going on. I believe they were likely correct and basing their opinion directly from observational data. Syphilis was rampant and education was extremely low. You think they were wrong, and assume observational data would refute it.
    - wizzwizz4 2y ago
      In this case, observational data did refute it. >> [list of stereotypes] contribute to […] the prevailing indifference with regards to treatment. >> the promise of medical treatment […] secured subjects' cooperation in the study However, you're right: I was actually using the heuristic "racists are full of shit". This heuristic is pretty useful, because it means you can do useful things with your life instead of analysing and refuting bullshit racist argument #453054624.
    - rectang 2y ago
      Characterizing "rather low intelligence of the Negro population" (not educational attainment, but "intelligence") as "likely correct" is shocking. But it's also not an uncommon perspective on HN. Lots of "The Bell Curve" truthers here.
      - s1artibartfast 2y ago
        I think educational attainment and intelligence are correlated, and understand the quote to be in relation to a specific group, time, and place (and not race as a category). Individuals arent statistics, but environmental circumstances have profound impact on cognitive development and intelligence measures.
  - somenameforme 2y ago
    Here is a study that gives a completely encyclopedic coverage of the context, data, and knowledge of the time. [1] If you're at all interested in this topic, I'd strongly encourage checking it out. It is the most extensively informative paper, on any topic, that I have ever seen, by far. I have no idea how many years the author spent collecting the data he presents there but it was clearly a labor of love. For some relevant points: in Georgia, they carried out widescale syphilis testing, on the scale of hundreds of thousands in 1945. Counties adjacent to Tuskegee reached 89% test coverage, with the outcome being an infection rate of 30% in black individuals and 3% in white individuals. Of course people wouldn't have known the exact numbers back when the Tuskegee study started in 1932, but with such ridiculously high rates of infection, they'd have had a generally accurate idea. It's also accurate that the majority of those who were infected had not proactively sought out medical treatment. That knowledge is part of what led Georgia to mandate the blood tests and pair it alongside recommendations of treatment for those infected. How do you think you would have framed these data at the time with a wide open Overton Window, no notions of political correctness, and so on? To be clear, as always, I am not defending the Tuskegee experiment, the people who did it, their views, or anything of the sort. They did awful things, obviously. But what I am trying to show is that if we were in their shoes, in the same situation, in the same context, it would have been all too easy to fall into the exact same trappings. It's only by really understanding the past that we might ever try to hope to avoid repeating it. When we simply demonize the past, the only lesson to be learned is don't be a demon. And certainly none of us think ourselves demons, so surely such things could never happen again. But with that mindset, they most assuredly will! [1] - https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/224795 https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullar...

s1artibartfast 2y ago

>You're asking me to provide a recorded observation, as evidence that the people recording "facts" didn't make observations. My theory doesn't expect that evidence to exist! I Don't understand either if your statements. You said the characterization of Marcon County was obviously wrong, but say there's no possible evidence way they could have known this. >reality, the promise of medical treatment, usually reserved only for emergencies among the rural black population of Macon County, Alabama, was what secured subjects' cooperation in the study What are you trying to say here? Is this bad? They gave medical care to people who wouldn't have it otherwise. Getting Medical Care is a reason people of all Races enroll in clinical trials and it's still true today

bobthepanda 2y ago
Normally you need to confirm a stereotype with data, not verify it after the fact. The treatment funding ran out during the study period, so this stopped being a benefit but the study continued anyways.
wizzwizz4 2y ago
They had a positive belief. Conventionally, people come to positive beliefs after observing evidence*. I'm accusing them of not doing this. They absolutely could have known better; they simply chose not to look. *: Exception: beliefs about Other Groups of People, which are conventionally formed by looking at Our Group of People, then inventing ways that Other Groups of People are different and/or worse.
- s1artibartfast 2y ago
  OK, I see what is going on. I believe they were likely correct and basing their opinion directly from observational data. Syphilis was rampant and education was extremely low. You think they were wrong, and assume observational data would refute it.
  - wizzwizz4 2y ago
    In this case, observational data did refute it. >> [list of stereotypes] contribute to […] the prevailing indifference with regards to treatment. >> the promise of medical treatment […] secured subjects' cooperation in the study However, you're right: I was actually using the heuristic "racists are full of shit". This heuristic is pretty useful, because it means you can do useful things with your life instead of analysing and refuting bullshit racist argument #453054624.
  - rectang 2y ago
    Characterizing "rather low intelligence of the Negro population" (not educational attainment, but "intelligence") as "likely correct" is shocking. But it's also not an uncommon perspective on HN. Lots of "The Bell Curve" truthers here.
    - s1artibartfast 2y ago
      I think educational attainment and intelligence are correlated, and understand the quote to be in relation to a specific group, time, and place (and not race as a category). Individuals arent statistics, but environmental circumstances have profound impact on cognitive development and intelligence measures.
- somenameforme 2y ago
  Here is a study that gives a completely encyclopedic coverage of the context, data, and knowledge of the time. [1] If you're at all interested in this topic, I'd strongly encourage checking it out. It is the most extensively informative paper, on any topic, that I have ever seen, by far. I have no idea how many years the author spent collecting the data he presents there but it was clearly a labor of love. For some relevant points: in Georgia, they carried out widescale syphilis testing, on the scale of hundreds of thousands in 1945. Counties adjacent to Tuskegee reached 89% test coverage, with the outcome being an infection rate of 30% in black individuals and 3% in white individuals. Of course people wouldn't have known the exact numbers back when the Tuskegee study started in 1932, but with such ridiculously high rates of infection, they'd have had a generally accurate idea. It's also accurate that the majority of those who were infected had not proactively sought out medical treatment. That knowledge is part of what led Georgia to mandate the blood tests and pair it alongside recommendations of treatment for those infected. How do you think you would have framed these data at the time with a wide open Overton Window, no notions of political correctness, and so on? To be clear, as always, I am not defending the Tuskegee experiment, the people who did it, their views, or anything of the sort. They did awful things, obviously. But what I am trying to show is that if we were in their shoes, in the same situation, in the same context, it would have been all too easy to fall into the exact same trappings. It's only by really understanding the past that we might ever try to hope to avoid repeating it. When we simply demonize the past, the only lesson to be learned is don't be a demon. And certainly none of us think ourselves demons, so surely such things could never happen again. But with that mindset, they most assuredly will! [1] - https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/224795 https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullar...