Wang is suing both the University of Pittsburgh and JAHA. His data were not at issue, but his conclusions were deemed unacceptable.
Wang was removed from his position and demoted by the university. The journal retracted it, his medical center renounced it, and Dr. The article’s peer-reviewed status did not help Wang once the controversy over its findings erupted. Among Wang’s anodyne conclusions was his belief that “all who aspire to a profession in medicine and cardiology must be assessed as individuals on the basis of their personal merits, not their racial and ethnic identities,” as well as his assessment that there “exists no empirical evidence by accepted standards for causal inference to support the mantra that ‘diversity saves lives.’” Wang’s peer-reviewed article, “Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity: Evolution of Race and Ethnicity Considerations for the Cardiology Workforce in the United States of America from 1969 to 2019,” was published by the Journal of the American Heart Association (JAHA). Most prominent among these was the case of Norman Wang, a cardiologist and associate professor at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, who wrote a paper questioning the efficacy of affirmative action in the medical profession. Can medical researchers engage in studies that come up with conclusions that do not correspond to the regnant political orthodoxy? We have recently seen multiple high-profile examples of this problem. THE anonymity here leads to a second question: Will wokeness get in the way of honest and needed research, or limit what doctors can say? Can doctors speak openly about difficult questions, and is there a prevailing political orthodoxy that is stifling speech in medicine? Here the evidence is unfortunately more compelling and is manifesting itself in two distinct and troubling ways.įirst is the problem of research. The problem here is not that there are legions of doctors who mistreat white patients, but that there are doctors who will openly speculate about mistreating white patients, that there are other medical professionals who will not rebuke them, and that the doctor who heard about this felt that he had to remain anonymous.
The anonymous quote stands out precisely because it is so dissonant with physicians’ sworn duties. Michelle Morse, was recently named first Chief Medical Officer of the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, and she explicitly hopes to “advance race equity”- equity being the new woke buzzword for not treating people equally.Īnother disturbing example came from the Yale School of Medicine, where a psychiatrist named Aruna Khilanani gave a talk called “The Psychopathic Problem of the White Mind.” She announced, “White people make my blood boil” and said, “I had fantasies of unloading a revolver into the head of any white person that got in my way, burying their body and wiping my bloody hands as I walked away relatively guiltless with a bounce in my step, like I did the world a favor.” On the other hand, proffering this idea has not set back the careers of its authors as much as it should have. A hospital spokesman told the Washington Free Beacon that such an initiative was “not currently underway at the hospital.” So far, so good. An experimental program was proposed at Boston’s highly regarded Brigham and Women’s Hospital that would offer “preferential treatment” to patients of color, with, presumably, less preferential treatment going to white patients. Is this principle under threat? The indications are largely anecdotal at this point. He is scolded by the grieving partner, who says, “What? Now you’re going to save the animal that shot him?” Willis’s immediate and unhesitating reply-“If I can”-indicates how deeply ingrained the concept of equal treatment in the medical profession is. Willis then has to deliver the sad news to the dead officer’s partner, before being called away to operate on the murderer.
DR ARUNA KHILANANI MD MOVIE
In the 2018 movie Death Wish, the filmmakers introduce the protagonist, a surgeon played by Bruce Willis who unsuccessfully tries to save the life of a gravely wounded Chicago police officer. This approach has long been widely accepted as a signal of a doctor’s morality and good character and has been broadly absorbed in our popular culture. At the national level, for example, Israeli doctors famously treat victims of terror attacks and the perpetrators of such attacks the same way, with no distinction. The Hippocratic Oath does not actually say, “First, do no harm.” What it does say is this: “Into whatever homes I go, I will enter them for the benefit of the sick.” It specifically directs doctors to avoid the mistreatment of patients, “whether they are free men or slaves.” The practical effects of this doctrine are extraordinary.
0 kommentar(er)
