Comments on: Revisiting Race in Medicine http://futilecycle.com/2007/07/30/revisiting-race-in-medicine A Wandering Through Life and Science Wed, 20 Aug 2008 01:41:53 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Ben http://futilecycle.com/2007/07/30/revisiting-race-in-medicine#comment-691 Ben Wed, 08 Aug 2007 05:01:19 +0000 http://futilecycle.com/2007/07/30/revisiting-race-in-medicine#comment-691 "But wouldn't a NUCLEAR MRI be better?" :-D “But wouldn’t a NUCLEAR MRI be better?” :-D

]]> By: Apollo http://futilecycle.com/2007/07/30/revisiting-race-in-medicine#comment-576 Apollo Tue, 31 Jul 2007 03:04:18 +0000 http://futilecycle.com/2007/07/30/revisiting-race-in-medicine#comment-576 Being PC is certainly part of it, but not without reason given the rather sordid past of American research with the Tuskegee study (perhaps not necessarily worse than in other countries, but not better either). Family and cultural histories are hard to forget, even if the mainstream has long since forgotten. Being PC is certainly part of it, but not without reason given the rather sordid past of American research with the Tuskegee study (perhaps not necessarily worse than in other countries, but not better either). Family and cultural histories are hard to forget, even if the mainstream has long since forgotten.

]]> By: Eric http://futilecycle.com/2007/07/30/revisiting-race-in-medicine#comment-566 Eric Mon, 30 Jul 2007 06:58:07 +0000 http://futilecycle.com/2007/07/30/revisiting-race-in-medicine#comment-566 Well, of course. Here, race has nothing to do with appearances, and more to do with lineage or ancestry. Really, it's a population-level family tree, in a sense, for a patient's medical history. And that in itself is just a surrogate marker for doing the genetic screen itself, the same way one would look at family histories of diabetes and cancer to inform diagnoses about a patient. I wonder if the primary squeemishness that people have is because of the use of the word "race", or whether the arguments against it are actually being made in sincerity. Maybe people are being unconsciously PC, and so are striving to reject race-based medicine for whatever reason they can find? Well, of course. Here, race has nothing to do with appearances, and more to do with lineage or ancestry. Really, it’s a population-level family tree, in a sense, for a patient’s medical history. And that in itself is just a surrogate marker for doing the genetic screen itself, the same way one would look at family histories of diabetes and cancer to inform diagnoses about a patient.

I wonder if the primary squeemishness that people have is because of the use of the word “race”, or whether the arguments against it are actually being made in sincerity. Maybe people are being unconsciously PC, and so are striving to reject race-based medicine for whatever reason they can find?

]]> By: Ben http://futilecycle.com/2007/07/30/revisiting-race-in-medicine#comment-565 Ben Mon, 30 Jul 2007 06:53:35 +0000 http://futilecycle.com/2007/07/30/revisiting-race-in-medicine#comment-565 I think the key here is that we are screening for genetic markers that happen to be coextensive with race, its not that we care particularly about the race of the patient -- this is not a "black" drug, it is a drug that happens to work well due to a genetic polymorphism that many African-Americans have and that some non-African Americans probably also have. Its a fine rhetorical distinction, that I think would make a lot of people accept "race-based medicine" who wouldn't otherwise. I think the key here is that we are screening for genetic markers that happen to be coextensive with race, its not that we care particularly about the race of the patient — this is not a “black” drug, it is a drug that happens to work well due to a genetic polymorphism that many African-Americans have and that some non-African Americans probably also have. Its a fine rhetorical distinction, that I think would make a lot of people accept “race-based medicine” who wouldn’t otherwise.

]]>