Yet another scientific hoax has been debunked. It turns out that white doctors don’t murder black babies in maternity wards. We can all breathe a collective sigh of relief. The study that was quoted from here to the Moon purporting that white doctors kill black babies en masse has been disproved:
There’s a whole thread at the link. Shocking, I know. Who could have thought that white doctors can actually control themselves and abstain from homiciding poor, innocent black babies?
This is for the people who told me Politico was a serious source of information and not a propaganda outlet:
https://x.com/politico/status/1835486270039933062?t=NQaaML4Te4O8EBZhKStBZQ&s=19
LikeLike
The same for people who think Time is a serious source: https://x.com/TIME/status/1835624167187636717?t=LIXDBluVux5xVgLhi-OJug&s=19
LikeLike
Is anybody surprised by the reverse-racism spewing out of Justice Jackson’s mouth? It was obvious who she was when our senile President, led blindly around by his far-left caretakers, appointed her as the DEI woke choice to the Supreme Court.
In the late 1960’s, I was a senior medical student at a Southern state medical school. This school had a VAST pool of 99% black charity patients. and not nearly enough M.D. staff (medical interns, residents, and faculty doctors) to handle the patient hold — so senior students like me were used essentially as slave labor to do almost all of the direct hands-on medical care that they wouldn’t have been allowed to do at non-crowed Ivy League medical schools.
Amazingly, it worked out well! During my six-week rotation in the Obstetric Ward, I worked a 12-hour shift six days a week and delivered over a HUNDRED healthy black babies with almost no supervision from the rarely seen resident staff physicians. Several of the mothers told me they planned to name their child after me.
Hey, this was back in the evil 1960’s — filled with vile racists like George Wallace and Lester Maddox — and yet I never saw a white medical student or physician kill a single black baby.
So today, over fifty years later, if privileged race-baiting idiots like Justice Jackson want to restart a race war that ended decades ago, they can go to hell as far as I’m concerned.
privileged race-baiting idiots like Justice Jackson want to restart a race war that ended decades ago
They have to, or else how can they sustain the anti-racist grift so memorably ridiculed in Matt Walsh’s “Am I a racist”?
The whole Civil Rights Act shenanigans would come crushing down in a matter of a few months if people stopped blathering about skin colour [I mean, who cares what your skin colour is?] and everybody started to take advantage of the opportunities afforded by American society and got on with his life.
Whew! Trial by fire. That sounds like you were very overworked and the hospital believed that sleep was for wimps and that there’s no relation between accidents or fucking up and being awake for over 24 hours. (Or did you never do shifts back to back?)
LikeLike
Jackson’s comments were beyond unacceptable and insulting to everyone in the medical community and doctors (like Driedel) who do god’s work on this planet. If this is not the case for libel, I don’t know what is. It is a great misfortune of the US that their highest court is now infested with such racist idiots.
I cannot in good faith support any political party that supports such racist vitriol, irrespective of whether their nominee is an idiot or genius. At the very least Harris could condemn such comments or distance herself from them…
Since the liberals keep telling us how silent tolerance is not good enough when it comes to believing in social justice causes and it is necessary to take a public stand and loudly, and incessantly, proclaim your support for them (lest you’d be labeled as a bigot!), their deafening silence be construed as condoning/supporting such statements automatically. They all are bigots for not explicitly condemning Jackson’s position.
Exactly. This “study” has now been debunked. It was used for years to promote DEI policies and harass people at work. Will they stopped being used now? If nobody makes any public statements, this will continue. How is this acceptable? It’s a major scandal but there’s no coverage, no discussion. A horrible, Soviet-style libel was spread, and there’s zero effort to take it back, apologize, and remove the policies that sprang out of it.
Seriously, people, can you not see why one can’t, in good conscience, vote for more of this? And as always, how do you know you won’t be libeled like this tomorrow?
Looked at the quote and looked at the tweet storm:
1)correlation doesn’t equal causation.
2)there’s an epidemic of not actually reading the words as they appear on the paper — “more likely to survive” is not the same as “accusing doctors of murder” dubious p hacking and study flaws aside.
3)everyone is so bad at this and not exaggerating their statements for effect.
4)this is the first I’ve heard of this study buried in the footnotes of a dissent that’s quoting an amicus curiae brief? (I’m not tracking down all of the amicus curiae briefs, I don’t have time)
Outrage is always fun and invigorating. It’s like cardio without actually doing cardio and the best part is that you don’t sweat your hair out.
LikeLike
If babies are less likely to survive, it means they are more likely to die. If white doctors make more black babies die, what else would you call it but a killing?
I’m glad it’s the first time you’ve heard of it. I’m in higher ed. This is quoted at us constantly and used to transform the existing procedures. But if you personally haven’t heard of it .. it must definitely mean that you haven’t heard of it. Thanks for that fascinating tidbit.
LikeLike
Again, a large gulf between a positive correlation between black doctors and lower black infant mortality and this idea that the obverse is white doctors killing black babies.
You can have a correlation without being able to point to any doctors’ actions or omissions in the aggregate as causing the result.
But, for argument’s sake:
LikeLike
Have you tried reading what you are responding to? There was no correlation. It’s all fake.
The issue here is not a shortage of doctors but the push to lower standards in medical schools to achieve a higher percentage of “diverse” doctors. That was, in fact, the result. You are arguing against a completely invented situation instead of looking at reality.
Hence the “if” before the a. and b. The “if” is important. Some people take a utilitarian view of innocent life and some people take the view that innocent life is priceless, so a question of marginality is pointless.
I brought up c because that would be another argument for a perceived lowering of standards by admitting more people to medical school (which after a certain point would lead to “diversifying” out of sheer quantity).
Doctors make the big bucks* because the credentialing organizations function like guilds.
C is not my conjecture. Unless you want to say: there is no such shortage or projected shortage of ob-gyns. Or that maybe giving birth at home or with a doula or midwife is equivalent or better than having an ob-gyn of low or middling quality, in which case why do we need more of them anyways?
LikeLike
A conservative literary critic and college professor
Clarissa's Blog 
Leave a comment