As with everything else, if non-Whites want something they should obviously be responsible for getting it for themselves. Look at all the H1B third world doctors and scientists pouring into the West. Send them back and put them to work on this.
The same issue comes up with medical compliance. If blacks do not take their blood pressure medications, it is the white or Asian-American care providers faults.
From NIH study: Disparities in medical compliance are primarily driven by systemic issues rather than patient refusal. Studies show patients of color face higher rates of implicit provider bias, poorer communication, and unequal access to care. Consequently, these systemic barriers heavily influence treatment adherence.
> Studies show patients of color face higher rates of implicit provider bias
Uh huh. Studies sure do show that. Here is a commentary on implicit bias studies by Atticus Li that seems honest, and probably about right. (The glass is only three-quarters empty.)
"The picture, in short, is this: implicit attitudes are real, discrimination is real, and the Implicit Association Test measures automatic association in a reliable way at the group level. The IAT is not a reliable individual-level diagnostic, IAT-based interventions do not reliably reduce discriminatory behavior, and the popular framing of the test as a window into unconscious racism that predicts individual conduct is not supported by the empirical literature and is not defended by the test’s own creators in their current peer-reviewed writing."
'Polygenic risk scores. These can help predict a person’s likelihood of developing complex diseases, like cardiovascular disease and breast cancer, from as early as infancy.'
How good are genes at predicting the likelihood of developing gun shot wounds?
It’s interesting that a large source of data comes from veterans. Could it be because white males are the ones that are actively defending our country.
This kind of research is best done in the many universities in Africa that produce most of the world's brain surgeons and rocket scientists. Like Barack Hussein O'Bama Sr. and his many children by his many wives
Because it’s white peoples fault for non-whites trusting the medias system. Remember Tuskegee! Henrietta Lacks! White peoples experiment and exploit and the white supremacy continues.
As a person who has some expertise in part of this, and as a professional skeptic (well, technically no one pays me to doubt things but I remain hopeful) I am bemused buy the way the author simply assumes that these polygenic scores will be a great boon to people's health. I could just as easily write this article from the point of view that white people will be subjected to more (unnecessary) tests and medications in future.
Mr. Kaufmans point strikes me as ignorant. When doing these analyses don't we already have a problem of too little examples for too many dimensions?
There is a huge problem with doing this work. Ideally you want a lot of detailed, standardized, long term outcomes data to pair with the SNP results and, as far as I know, we still don't have that.
I'm also not surprised she used the example of Cholesterol lowering meds. Every five years or so I read the latest reviews on those and I always come away underwhelmed. That is not medical advice. It's just that with the amount of faith doctors put in these things and the way they keep lowering the number they want, you'd think these were obviously saving lots of lives...you know how Steve writes about Africans' belief in witchcraft? Sometimes I think cholesterol is witchcraft for white people.
I mean, the author implies that a person with a high cardiovascular risk polygenic score (which, BTW only works on the population it came from so you kind of think it doesn't reflect underlying biology very specifically) should get cholesterol lowering drugs even if their cholesterol is under the magic number? If not, what use is the polygenic score? That people can look out for their health? If they don't already do that why would this convince them?
In summary if I were a betting man, I'd bet against this tool being a huge net life saver but like Yogi Berra said....
These genomics tools are of no value and cannot be fixed, because Race Is Only A Social Construct. At the same time, by using the data that are available (mostly from white volunteers), scientists and clinicians are being sinful white supremacists, gleefully privileging the health of their co-ethnics while callously ignoring the plight of People Of Color.
My tally of the NYT subscribers' comments to this article reflect pretty well on them:
* 4 follow reporter Nunn in Not Getting The Joke
* 8 push back: "Wait! I thought race was a construct?"
* 10 have something different to say (half smart, the other half stupid)
> “If you’re going to pick a population to study for the sake of everybody’s good, the Europeans are the worst you could choose,” said Jay Kaufman, an epidemiologist at McGill University who has written about race and genomics.
NYT reporter Emma Baumgaertner Nunn is approaching journalistic malpractice (if there is still such a thing) by quoting Kaufman, without providing context on his views.
ChatGPT gives a good enough summary:
"'The Race Variable: How Statistical Practices Reinforce Inequality' (2025) is Kaufman's major statement on race and genomics. He argues that:
* Race is fundamentally a social variable rather than a biological exposure;
* Routine statistical adjustment for race often obscures the true causal mechanisms underlying health disparities;
* Researchers should focus on measurable causal factors (e.g., discrimination, socioeconomic conditions, environmental exposures, access to care) instead of treating race itself as an explanatory variable."
--- end ChatGPT quote ---
In other words, to the extent Kaufman is correct, the initiatives that Nunn is hand-wringing about are all worthless. The guy is just another self-hating anti-white (sorry, anti-"European") academic. Get in line.
Might as well ask a flat-earther to critique the low earth orbits that Starlink uses.
Wait, so race is just a social construct and achievement gaps are all a product of racist discrimination, but also health data is invalid if it comes mostly from white people? Journalism remains very selective about who it asks hard questions.
“But scientists only found the variant because one study in Dallas had ensured that its participant pool was more than half Black.”
In 2020 the NYT would have followed this up with something like “Like the Rooney Rule in the NFL, this is just another of countless examples of the value of remedying the persistent under representation of Black voices and perspectives.”
Yet another hole in the “race is a social construct” assertion.
As with everything else, if non-Whites want something they should obviously be responsible for getting it for themselves. Look at all the H1B third world doctors and scientists pouring into the West. Send them back and put them to work on this.
The same issue comes up with medical compliance. If blacks do not take their blood pressure medications, it is the white or Asian-American care providers faults.
From NIH study: Disparities in medical compliance are primarily driven by systemic issues rather than patient refusal. Studies show patients of color face higher rates of implicit provider bias, poorer communication, and unequal access to care. Consequently, these systemic barriers heavily influence treatment adherence.
> Studies show patients of color face higher rates of implicit provider bias
Uh huh. Studies sure do show that. Here is a commentary on implicit bias studies by Atticus Li that seems honest, and probably about right. (The glass is only three-quarters empty.)
"The picture, in short, is this: implicit attitudes are real, discrimination is real, and the Implicit Association Test measures automatic association in a reliable way at the group level. The IAT is not a reliable individual-level diagnostic, IAT-based interventions do not reliably reduce discriminatory behavior, and the popular framing of the test as a window into unconscious racism that predicts individual conduct is not supported by the empirical literature and is not defended by the test’s own creators in their current peer-reviewed writing."
https://atticusli.com/replication-crisis/iat-implicit-bias/#whats-honest-to-say-about-implicit-bias-now
Abbreviated version - 'Grifterhood is powerful!'
'Polygenic risk scores. These can help predict a person’s likelihood of developing complex diseases, like cardiovascular disease and breast cancer, from as early as infancy.'
How good are genes at predicting the likelihood of developing gun shot wounds?
It’s interesting that a large source of data comes from veterans. Could it be because white males are the ones that are actively defending our country.
Yes, the military has learned through experience that IQ is a strong indicator of survivability on the battlefield. (Viz McNamara's Morons.)
This kind of research is best done in the many universities in Africa that produce most of the world's brain surgeons and rocket scientists. Like Barack Hussein O'Bama Sr. and his many children by his many wives
Jay Kaufman. huh? We are going to be Every Single Timed into oblivion
a third of the time it works every single time
"The most obvious solution is to recruit more people of color."
"Still, recruitment can be an upstream endeavor..."
So, they don't even want to help themselves. Why should I care more about them than they care about themselves?
Because it’s white peoples fault for non-whites trusting the medias system. Remember Tuskegee! Henrietta Lacks! White peoples experiment and exploit and the white supremacy continues.
It's not the data. Non whites will have worse outcomes.
Because.
They always do.
Because.
Race has no scientific basis! Uh, unless we’re saving breasts. Everyone likes those.
"Howard, you really think they're gonna let you put out a whole movie just about tits?"
"Sure. Who doesn't like tits?"
As a person who has some expertise in part of this, and as a professional skeptic (well, technically no one pays me to doubt things but I remain hopeful) I am bemused buy the way the author simply assumes that these polygenic scores will be a great boon to people's health. I could just as easily write this article from the point of view that white people will be subjected to more (unnecessary) tests and medications in future.
Mr. Kaufmans point strikes me as ignorant. When doing these analyses don't we already have a problem of too little examples for too many dimensions?
There is a huge problem with doing this work. Ideally you want a lot of detailed, standardized, long term outcomes data to pair with the SNP results and, as far as I know, we still don't have that.
I'm also not surprised she used the example of Cholesterol lowering meds. Every five years or so I read the latest reviews on those and I always come away underwhelmed. That is not medical advice. It's just that with the amount of faith doctors put in these things and the way they keep lowering the number they want, you'd think these were obviously saving lots of lives...you know how Steve writes about Africans' belief in witchcraft? Sometimes I think cholesterol is witchcraft for white people.
I mean, the author implies that a person with a high cardiovascular risk polygenic score (which, BTW only works on the population it came from so you kind of think it doesn't reflect underlying biology very specifically) should get cholesterol lowering drugs even if their cholesterol is under the magic number? If not, what use is the polygenic score? That people can look out for their health? If they don't already do that why would this convince them?
In summary if I were a betting man, I'd bet against this tool being a huge net life saver but like Yogi Berra said....
These genomics tools are of no value and cannot be fixed, because Race Is Only A Social Construct. At the same time, by using the data that are available (mostly from white volunteers), scientists and clinicians are being sinful white supremacists, gleefully privileging the health of their co-ethnics while callously ignoring the plight of People Of Color.
My tally of the NYT subscribers' comments to this article reflect pretty well on them:
* 4 follow reporter Nunn in Not Getting The Joke
* 8 push back: "Wait! I thought race was a construct?"
* 10 have something different to say (half smart, the other half stupid)
Oh I get the gag. I just think the author's point is not only silly but meta-silly
> “If you’re going to pick a population to study for the sake of everybody’s good, the Europeans are the worst you could choose,” said Jay Kaufman, an epidemiologist at McGill University who has written about race and genomics.
NYT reporter Emma Baumgaertner Nunn is approaching journalistic malpractice (if there is still such a thing) by quoting Kaufman, without providing context on his views.
ChatGPT gives a good enough summary:
"'The Race Variable: How Statistical Practices Reinforce Inequality' (2025) is Kaufman's major statement on race and genomics. He argues that:
* Race is fundamentally a social variable rather than a biological exposure;
* Routine statistical adjustment for race often obscures the true causal mechanisms underlying health disparities;
* Researchers should focus on measurable causal factors (e.g., discrimination, socioeconomic conditions, environmental exposures, access to care) instead of treating race itself as an explanatory variable."
--- end ChatGPT quote ---
In other words, to the extent Kaufman is correct, the initiatives that Nunn is hand-wringing about are all worthless. The guy is just another self-hating anti-white (sorry, anti-"European") academic. Get in line.
Might as well ask a flat-earther to critique the low earth orbits that Starlink uses.
Wait, so race is just a social construct and achievement gaps are all a product of racist discrimination, but also health data is invalid if it comes mostly from white people? Journalism remains very selective about who it asks hard questions.
Not exactly up-to-the-minute news, but I know Steve has been wishing for this for some time:
https://creedandculturebooks.substack.com/p/aleksandr-solzhenitsyns-two-hundred
Baumgaertner
QED
Come to think of it, there weren't many minority characters in Gattaca...
They shoehorned a couple in in the final scene.
Ah, well then I suppose we can rest assured that eugenic dystopia will come to them along with the rest of us.
“But scientists only found the variant because one study in Dallas had ensured that its participant pool was more than half Black.”
In 2020 the NYT would have followed this up with something like “Like the Rooney Rule in the NFL, this is just another of countless examples of the value of remedying the persistent under representation of Black voices and perspectives.”