- Joined
- Dec 14, 2003
- Messages
- 3,360
Why hasn't he just fucking disappeared?
Probably something to do with him previously being the President.Funny how he's refered to as 'President Trump'
It mentions race for very specific treatments that are in short supply. It mentions it as a factor because black people specifically are more likely to get covid worse than white ones.Donald Trump taking advantage of this:
Opinion | New York’s Race-Based Preferential Covid Treatments
New guidelines say whites may not be eligible for antibodies and antivirals, while nonwhites are.www.wsj.com
looks like a policy that explicitly mentions race - not socio economic status - as a qualifying factor.
He's using it for his own means, of course, but on the face of it he's not wrong. And Democratic policymakers should know and be better.
Funny how he's refered to as 'President Trump'
Yes. Yes it is.It's called race-baiting.
...because of socio-economic status and cultural issues that mean they're less likely ro get vaccinated.black people specifically are more likely to get covid worse than white ones
Missing the point. Data before vaccination was even a thing found that black people were more likely to get covid more seriously.Firstly Wij:
Yes. Yes it is.
But:
...because of socio-economic status and cultural issues that mean they're less likely ro get vaccinated.
However, the policy is based on colour of skin - not economic status. So is de-facto racist.
That's why Trump is using it to his nefarious ends. It's a racist policy run by dems in NY.
The fact that utah is equally as dumb is by-the-by - Trump already lands his punch.
I've a further, additional, argument to make: colour-of-skin policies are incredibly dangerous. If black people are more likely to carry covid because of the colour of their skin (which is what colour of skin policies say) - then you lend weight to the arguments of racists who would wish to segregate and exclude people based on their colour of skin.
Colour of skin policies legitimise racist arguments.
Because they are black,? or because of cultural and socioeconomic status / living in HMOs, crowded housing etc?Missing the point. Data before vaccination was even a thing found that black people were more likely to get covid more seriously.
Completely aware of stuff like sickle cell etc. But not seen a single thing on covid other than socioeconomic status and cultural sillyness.There are a couple of conditions that are predominantly found more in certain ethnic groups. The conditions aren't racist, btw.
Well now you have.Completely aware of stuff like sickle cell etc. But not seen a single thing on covid other than socioeconomic status and cultural sillyness.
Comorbidity. If you have sickle cell disease you should be a priority. And they already will have - because they'll have been getting treated for it for years.Well now you have.
And there are lots of studies showing that black people, native Americans, Pacific Islanders etc are more likely die from covid and the data is not yet conclusive enough to be able to show that this is entirely to do with co-morbidities, age, number of people per household or anything else. It's just not conclusive yet. In the absence of that and an individualised questionnaire for all other confounding factors being given to people in respiratory distress it is surely ok to accept the guidance that maybe ethnic group should be something to consider clinically.Comorbidity. If you have sickle cell disease you should be a priority. And they already will have - because they'll have been getting treated for it for years.
NOT the same as simply having "black skin".
Your hatred of Trump is blinding you to actual racism. If people are serious about taking Trump on and negating his race-baiting then they *have* to be squeaky clean - because any chink in the armour gives him cards to play that aren't just total bullshit.
Given how the Trump Org is run I’d say it’s not a long way at all. He can hardly claim to be at arms length with no operational control or knowledge.Even if they find trumps organisation is corrupt, it's a long way from laying a glove on trump.
That's quite a bold statement @Wij. Have you come to this conclusion yourself or is there expert opinion that says this?And there are lots of studies showing that black people, native Americans, Pacific Islanders etc are more likely die from covid and the data is not yet conclusive enough to be able to show that this is entirely to do with co-morbidities, age, number of people per household or anything else. It's just not conclusive yet
I'm absolutely not trying to have it both ways. If black people are more susceptible to serious covid than white ones once other factors have been controlled out then it must have a genetic basis. The fact that black and white people have different distributions of genes is not at all controversial or racist. If they didn't we would all look the same. Black people are more susceptible (and for other diseases less so) to other diseases. Just like taking people's sex into account in a clinical situation is not controversial.Even if I accept your argument (and I'm not) - then as you say explicitly say above - "the data is just not conclusive yet" - so that would have to include the genetic basis for increased susceptibility for covid morbidity. You can't have it both ways.
We absolutely have evidence showing that black people are more likely to die from Covid. What we don't have is enough data and double-blind experiments etc to prove that this is not about the genetic differences between races. Therefore 'un-evidenced' is completely misleading. These are clinical decisions. It's not a court of law. Until it's proven exactly what the mechanism is then it is perfectly acceptable to consider it. Mentioning race is not racist.If we're serious about undermining Trump then we cannot use un-evidenced supposition to prioritise medical treatments based on the colour of people's skin. Especially when there are plenty of other things we can point at to bring out a fair outcome: "Oh! You're in the lowest 25% income base? Great! - we'll prioritise these treatments - oh, you happen to be black do you? Well, who knew?!"
By your own admission, there's no strong evidence for this. So policies based on skin colour alone are unacceptable.I'm absolutely not trying to have it both ways. If black people are more susceptible to serious covid than white ones once other factors have been controlled out then it must have a genetic basis
Yes, and a lot of strong evidence showing socio-economic status, structural racism leads to worse outcome for a whole range of diseases for black people, not just covid. So making a policy around socio-economic status is certainly reasonable.We absolutely have evidence showing that black people are more likely to die from Covid.
Agree. 100%. But in the absence of evidence - excluding a set of people from a medical intervention based on their skin colour alone IS.Mentioning race is not racist.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RCcKXz1P3vU
very interesting and a sad indictment of the media
Turn off the internet but then people would just go back to religions for their fix of ‘I’m living in a sci-fi fantasy space opera’.Texas butterfly centre closes after QAnon threats
The National Butterfly Center in Texas was a major opponent of the US-Mexico border wall.www.bbc.co.uk
The country is barking mad, I don't even know how you go about fixing such large group delusion.