Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Journal of American Medical Association Embraces “Structural Racism” Dogma, Succumbing To Critical Race Activism

Journal of American Medical Association Embraces “Structural Racism” Dogma, Succumbing To Critical Race Activism

Allegiance to CRT pledged after Deputy Editor committed thought crime of saying: “Structural racism is an unfortunate term. Personally, I think taking racism out of the conversation will help. Many of us are offended by the concept that we are racist.”

I’d like to say that what just happened at the prestigious Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) is the canary in the coal mine as to the destruction that critical race theory, in the form of the neo-racist “anti-racism” deception, is wreaking on the sciences.

But that canary long ago died from the toxic fumes of an ideology in which race is the obsessive focus of activists seeking to tear down supposedly systemically racist structures.

I warned in 2017 that the hard sciences would not be immune to the poison that already had destroyed the humanities and social sciences:

I don’t know if there are any uncorrupted institutions left that matter. The education system, from public grade school through public and private higher ed, is gone. The frontal assault on free speech on campuses is the result. If you think this is just a Humanities and Social Sciences problem, stay tuned. In 3-5 years, if we’re still here, we’ll be writing about how the social justice warriors have corrupted the STEM fields. It’s happening now, it’s just not in the headlines yet.

And so it has come to pass in medicine. We pointed in an earlier post to what is happening at SUNY Upstate Medical Center in Syracuse, NY, and that is symptomatic of what is happening at medical schools around the nation.

JAMA is infected. The Editor-in-Chief has been placed on leave because one of his Deputy Editors disagreed in a podcast whether structural racism is a problem in medicine.

The NY Times reports:

Following controversial comments on racism in medicine made by a deputy editor at JAMA, the editor in chief of the prominent medical journal was placed on administrative leave on Thursday.

A committee of the American Medical Association, which oversees the journal, said Dr. Howard Bauchner would be replaced by an interim editor pending results of an independent investigation. The decision was announced on Thursday in an email to employees.

JAMA is one of the world’s leading medical journals, publishing research that shapes the scientific agenda and public policy around the globe. The controversy began when Dr. Ed Livingston, a deputy editor, said on a Feb. 24 podcast that structural racism no longer existed in the United States.

“Structural racism is an unfortunate term,” said Dr. Livingston, who is white. “Personally, I think taking racism out of the conversation will help. Many people like myself are offended by the implication that we are somehow racist.”

This is wrong on two levels — one that a Deputy Editor cannot disagree as to structural racism in medicine, and two that his Editor-in-Chief would be held responsible.

The Times continues:

The podcast was promoted with a tweet from the journal that said, “No physician is racist, so how can there be structural racism in health care?” The response to both was swift and angry, prompting the journal to take down the podcast and delete the tweet.

A week later, Dr. Bauchner addressed the controversy. “Comments made in the podcast were inaccurate, offensive, hurtful, and inconsistent with the standards of JAMA,” Dr. Bauchner said in a statement. “We are instituting changes that will address and prevent such failures from happening again.”

Dr. Livingston later resigned….

Many in the medical community said that the journal had not gone far enough and that the events offered an opportunity to make more systemic changes. In an email sent to leaders of the A.M.A., a group of doctors called for “a careful investigation of the JAMA editorial staff and board, up to and including the removal of Dr. Howard Bauchner.”

The authors also initiated a petition, now signed by nearly 7,000 people, asking the journal to hold Dr. Bauchner accountable and to review and restructure the editorial process.

Here is Dr. Bauchner groveling in a subsequent JAMA panel discussion on Structural Racism In Medicine:

As happens on many college campuses, JAMA capitulated to weaponized emotions, the Times further reported:

“That podcast should never have happened,” said Dr. Uché Blackstock, an emergency physician in New York. “That tweet should never have happened. The fact that podcast was conceived of, recorded and posted was unconscionable.”

“I think it caused an incalculable amount of pain and trauma to Black physicians and patients,” she said. “And I think it’s going to take a long time for the journal to heal that pain.”

The JAMA history has been purged, the NY Post reports:

The podcast’s audio has been deleted from JAMA’s website and replaced with a statement from Bauchner in which he said comments in the podcast — which also featured Dr. Mitch Katz — were “inaccurate, offensive, hurtful and inconsistent with the standards of JAMA.”

He added: “Racism and structural racism exist in the US and in health care. After careful consideration, I determined that the harms caused by the podcast outweighed any reason for the podcast to remain available on the JAMA Network.

“I once again apologize for the harms caused by this podcast and the tweet about the podcast. We are instituting changes that will address and prevent such failures from happening again,” Bauchner added.

Also deleted from the site was a JAMA tweet promoting the podcast that said: “No physician is racist, so how can there be structural racism in health care? An explanation of the idea by doctors for doctors in this user-friendly podcast.”

Medicine and other professions, including law, are being destroyed from within. You just don’t know it yet.

Don’t call medicine a victim of “wokeness” — that is too kind a word.

Our society cannot withstand this poison. That’s the point of it, isn’t it.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

A most worrisome trend. What is needed is serious, thoughtful exchanges of well-considered views on sensitive topics, not continual hysteria.

    Olinser in reply to cato. | March 27, 2021 at 9:24 pm

    Democrats don’t WANT an exchange of well-considered views.

    They want power, and race hysteria fuels their power.

    Ben Kent in reply to cato. | March 27, 2021 at 10:47 pm

    “First, do no harm” – an oath every doctor takes.

    CRT does tons of harm by turning everything into a race-based decision.

    Doctors are not known for being dumb. It’s amazing that they would allow this to infest their profession.

    I call on ALL doctors and healthcare professionals to cancel their subscription to JAMA.
    Everyone – Talk to your Doctor and inform them about this move by JAMA.

    It’s time to draw the line. This is as good a place as any. In fact, it will get attention.

    Talk to your doctor – tell others.

      randian in reply to Ben Kent. | March 28, 2021 at 12:07 am

      It’s amazing that they would allow this to infest their profession.

      Why is it amazing? The AMA has been woke for decades.

        By now, why would anyone be surprised? The scientific establishment caved many years ago by abandoning “the science” to becoming a religion. Here in Pasadena, I witnessed JPL and Cal Tech get taken over by the global warming crowd early on. That was maybe twenty years ago. Today, no one gets hired or can get a government grant without first officially signing off on the man=made climate change.

        We are all now being forced to kneel to the new gods of everything and although most of the population knows better, only the corrupt and stupid are allowed into the discussion.

        henrybowman in reply to randian. | March 28, 2021 at 5:04 pm

        JAMA is the “voice of healthcare professionals” in name only. Every time they venture outside their own lane, the results are embarrassing. Their “gun research” articles are uniformly uninformed, trivially debunked, and would be risible if they weren’t so dangerous to American rights. And like oblivious drunk drivers, when you complain to them, they continue to insist that the lane they were occupying was in fact theirs (because “everything that preserves your life is medicine,” or equivalent cockswaddle).

        (“Learn a new word every day!”)

    “What is needed is serious, thoughtful exchanges of well-considered views on sensitive topics, not continual hysteria.”

    I hope my sarcasm meter is broken.

    artichoke in reply to cato. | March 28, 2021 at 1:36 am

    No, I agree with the general tone of the article in that it’s too late for that. Don’t bother.

    The best thing I can think of is to keep track of who is discriminating against those who are not black or latino, and to avoid their services. This will result in quite a bit of de-facto racial segregation, but we didn’t start this war and we’re entitled to protect our own interests (an idea that anti-racism does not agree with !)

      henrybowman in reply to artichoke. | March 28, 2021 at 5:08 pm

      No, it doesn’t. Anti-racism is the concept that you are required to expend personal effort actively contributing to the promulgation of issues and activities that do not benefit you or your family in the least, and conversely can result in an actual reduction in their quality of life.

      The old word for that concept was “slavery.”

This horror cannot continue. We need to organize, but are we doing it yet? If we are, I don’t see it.

“Structural racism” has been diagnosed as real by JAMA. Now, along with a whole raft of CME requirements… add this new one. Frankly, those that insist on this need to have their serum porcelain levels checked. Next, we will have to return to bleeding patients. So… to compensate for higher levels of obesity, heart disease and diabetes in certain populations do we neglect medical care of other groups so as to create equity in bad outcomes.

As as aside, my specialty was thrown under the bus by the AMA decades ago so I really have very little regard for the AMA these days. JAMA was one of the last holdouts.. was….

    henrybowman in reply to alaskabob. | March 28, 2021 at 5:58 pm

    “need to have their serum porcelain levels checked”

    Not sure if this is a whiteness joke or a crapness joke. 🙂

I’m a nurse and I am disgusted

My mother told me decades ago, always pick a Jewish Dr, they are the best

She was right

    Imagine this scenario:

    You are wheeled into a hospital emergency room for a life-threatening illness or accident. What would anyone think about affirmative action as they’re pressed to pick the doctor who would save their life?

      You are wheeled into a hospital emergency room for a life threatening…….
      and, if you’re in Boston, the diversity director has the ambulance crew leave you in the hall in order to treat the toenail fungus of the latinx person. If their cardiology service is going to prioritize patients based on race, well….

        No need for imaginary scenarios. A few weeks ago here in LA, Fake Doctor Herrera ordered a hospital to destroy some 300 vaccines rather than transfer them somewhere else where they were needed. Why? Because back then, vaccines were only distributed based on strictly-enforced priority list of who was qualified. The elderly were not yet a priority. Meanwhile they were crying about a shortage of vaccines.

        These people are pure evil incarnate.

“I think it caused an incalculable amount of pain and trauma to Black physicians and patients,” (“Uche”) said.

Incalculable because it’s so small? Remind me how many black (or white) patients read JAMA.

Legal Lunchbox™ Series: Understanding Systemic Racism in the Law
Date:

March 30, 2021
Time: 12:00 PM – 1:35 PM

Last summer, our Washington Supreme Court called on the legal community to take steps to recognize and address the racial injustice plaguing our country. Heeding the Court’s call to action, we are offering a series of Legal Lunchbox CLEs focused on racial injustice. In March, we will start by understanding the roots of systemic racism in the law and explore how it impacts various areas of practice and client communities.

The moon rose over my house tonight. It was white. This caused an incalculable amount of pain to all of my black and latinx neighbors.

Their BS seems to be working, at least on the indoctrinated, who appear to be 99% of graduates of the public education system over the past decade. There are enough of ’em to scare the editors of a medical journal that few normal doctors read anymore, as they’ve long gone over to all leftism, all the time. Perhaps this is why less than 20% of physicians bother with the AMA. They could shut down tomorrow and nobody would notice. Things like this imply they’re still important, but they’re not.

    Turtler in reply to Chicklet. | March 28, 2021 at 12:39 pm

    “Perhaps this is why less than 20% of physicians bother with the AMA. They could shut down tomorrow and nobody would notice. Things like this imply they’re still important, but they’re not.”

    A brilliant and interesting comment. But it does make me wonder if there might be another dimension to this, and a reason why they might be doing it. If this is some kind of strategy used to target the 80%~ of physicians and other medical practitioners who do not kiss the ring of the AMA by adopting new, racially based hogwash and then screeching at the others as being “racist” for not adhering to AMA “standards.” So that the wrongthink can be purged… and coincidentally the AMA can get a new whiff of relevance, if only by lining up softball interviews with the MSM’s propaganda to decry the expansion of “White Supremacy” among non-AMA Physicians…..

      randian in reply to Turtler. | March 28, 2021 at 4:58 pm

      So that the wrongthink can be purged

      A lot of doctors work for large corporate employers, and those employers are easily influenced to the side of wokeness if they aren’t already on board. What remains is accusing doctors in private practice of being racists if they aren’t on board.

    randian in reply to Chicklet. | March 28, 2021 at 4:56 pm

    Perhaps this is why less than 20% of physicians bother with the AMA

    That doesn’t matter. The AMA controls medical school accreditation, just like the ABA controls law school accreditation. You can’t get your medical license if you didn’t attend an AMA accredited school, so you must suffer whatever woke crap the AMA demands your school inflict upon you, and you must repeat whatever oaths of fealty to wokeness they demand you take.

Progressive Socialists have succeeded in taking control of most mainstream news media publications and are using race-baiting to extend control to the media that are still marginally independent.

The ones they cannot control – they target for de-platforming. FOX News and others. They are persistent and will not stop until there is one approved narrative.

Since cardiology is a limited resource, the preferential admission of low-risk (based on actual presented symptoms) blacks is going to kill high-risk whites. No, that doesn’t bother them, since they’d only be killing white supremacists.

” Personally, I think taking racism out of the conversation will help.”

This nails it. I have been of the opinion that race relations have done nothing but continually improve over this Boomer’s life (with a few minor glitches in some cities in the 60’s). It was Barack Hussein Obama who slammed the brakes on and instigated this current climate of disinformation, propaganda and the overwhelming desire to find racism where very little if any exists.

Will they be lowering standards for graduating from medical schools to accommodate demands for more non-white doctors? You know, to help remedy ‘systemic racism’ and ‘white privilege’?

Will Dem members of Congress lead by choosing such graduates for their health care?

Rhetorical question. Of course not. Non-white doctors who would have failed med school in the past but are now given med degrees because they’re non-white are for the proles.

All across the woke corporate landscape we can expect to see a decline in the quality of the goods and services offered to the proles. That’s what happens when incompetents are hired and promoted based solely on the color of their skin and the competent are passed over. The competent won’t pick up the slack because they won’t be rewarded. They’ll do the minimum they must to not get fired. Or they’ll quit and move on.

We’ve seen this phenomenon before. Wherein incompetents are hired and promoted and the competent are not rewarded. That’s the way things worked in the Soviet Union.

We don’t have structural racism. That is what they are imposing on us. All non-white Americans (except Asians) must now all go back to their own tribes so that white people can be isolated, fragmented and easily discriminated against. It’s only racism when white people do this.

Stop with this latinx crap

Latino baby

    henrybowman in reply to gonzotx. | March 28, 2021 at 6:09 pm

    Unless she’s a Latina baby.
    This is the sort of cognitive dissonance you get when a bunch of Morlocks who insist that gender is continuously fluid have to deal with a language in which gender is absolutely determinate.

    Virginia42 in reply to gonzotx. | March 29, 2021 at 11:06 am

    Seriously. WTF is “Latinx?” Doesn’t work in Spanish. It’s some sort of woketard invention.

FWIW Scott Adams asked for people to provide him with examples of real, structural racism… Nobody could.. what he more or less came up with was that it really (in this country) only exists in academia.. and that was part of the whole admissions fiasco. That is the only real racism I saw at that point.

I think the AMA has joined a growing group of windmill jousters. There are deadly issues here,, but no,,, gotta get those windmills. God help us all.

This is the same “medical” establishment that denies the existence out an outpatient treatment for COVID-19, and pushes nonsensical control measures that have little to no prophylactic effect.

These are not scientists, and they are not ethical doctors. They are some variety of whore.

Modern leftism is a totalitarian revival of Mussolini’s ideology; not Hitler’s but line for line

Merger between party and state-Check
Fear mongering based on something you know isn’t a threat (Communism for Mussolini, ironically Fascism for Democrats-Check
Merger between party and big business-Check
Ideological conformity in the military-Check
Using the force of state party and big business to remove your opponents from society-Check
Politicizing everything in order to gain control over it-Check
Using maximum power wherever you have power even if you have very little-Check
Total control of the media in order to crack down on “misinformation” (being sought by Democrats achieved by Mussolini)-Check
Double standards one for my supporters another for the rest-Check
Willingness to disregard all earlier political norms if it means more power-Check
Belief in race as “critical”-Check

LukeHandCool | March 28, 2021 at 1:40 pm

Every two or three years we have sexual harassment training.

Now, for the first time, we’re going to have “anti-bias” training.

This bullsh*t is spreading like wildfire about to engulf our country. And of the people in this country who have a prominent voice, very, very few are acting as firefighters.

    alohahola in reply to LukeHandCool. | April 3, 2021 at 5:09 pm

    Well, they had Marxist training in Russia and Eastern Europe. They learned their Marxism well.

    And made really good money on the black market.

Anyone stupid enough to believe this illogical insanity needs to be culled from whatever profession they are in.

LukeHandCool | March 28, 2021 at 2:21 pm

I have absolutely no interest in the Royal Family, but this daily log by Piers Morgan over his cancellation for not believing Meghan Markle I found to be fascinating. The thought crime of not believing her inconsistencies and lies cost him his job overnight. You must believe everything out of the mouths of people of color or else!!

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9409927/PIERS-MORGAN-REAL-truth-Writing-time-dramatic-exit-GMB.html

“preferential admissions … cardiology” seems certain to provoke a backlash. Because, when you’re seeing a physician for a sore throat (or something) you can probably afford to take a chance that that your doctor maybe isn’t the brightest, but you won’t much care as even a barely-adequate physician will probably get it right. (Yes I know, even a throat infection might kill you. But it’s not very likely to, even if you get no treatment at all for it other than OTC and home remedies.)

But when you’re talking “cardio” you’re usally talking about something serious. And when you (or someone you care about) is facing a serious threat to life (or continued quality of life) you don’t want the doctor who just barely scraped by and got by; you want one who’s very, very good.

Yet it’s already difficult for patients to evaluate the quality of care offered by different physicians, both because they’re seldom qualified to do so and because so long as a doctor continues to practice that doctor’s mistakes will remain hidden to practically everyone, and almost certainly to prospective patients.

In such an information-poor environment, doubling-down on admitting, promoting and retaining medical doctors of questionable ability will inevitably result in patients shunning those who might, had it not been for preferences, have been culled. Since patients have no way to know who would have been culled had it not been for preferences and who would have excelled without them, they can only apply this judgement indiscriminately.

And yes, in some abstract sense it’s unfair to these physicians to treat them differently just because they might have relied on preferences. BUT, given a choice between potentially hurting some stranger’s feelings or improving the odds that you (or someone you care about) get high-quality medical care (or at least avoid the worst of the worst) for something as serious as cardio, which option do you think patients will choose?

So, here’s my prediction: medical organizations will be doing more to restrict patients’ choices. As in, “We choose your cardiology team for you. Or go somewhere else” And because this will be imposed by those mammoth medical-service organizations that have replaced private practices, and because all of them will do this, you likely will have no real choice at all.

Unless you’re very, very rich (or at least very well-connected).

    alohahola in reply to Albigensian. | April 3, 2021 at 5:07 pm

    This is why you need to take care of yourself: your body and mind.

    And stop getting regular data-mining checkups.

Zeke Emmanuel, the bioethicist* for ObamaCare, made age-based discrimination a part of the program. No surprise that race-based discrimination is being added to the mix.

* bioethicist: that profession dedicated to contriving artful statements for justifying what someone knows is wrong, but wants to do anyway.

“Our society cannot withstand this poison. That’s the point of it, isn’t it.”

But it *can* withstand the poison.

It just needs to be dealt with from a different angle. Too many people are fighting it head on.

You must outwit it.

People suffer from their culture and not their race. Given that 90% of blacks murdered in the Us are murdered by other blacks, I don’t think Whitey is the big issue here, unless the goal is some sort of shakedown.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend