A medical watchdog group has called out a recently cited study that claims having racially diverse medical facilities improves outcomes for Black patients. Thought DEI had been pushed to the back burner? Think again.
Do No Harm, a nonprofit organization focused on opposing ideological influence in medicine, released a report Tuesday disputing a recent study by economists Michael Frakes and Jonathan Gruber that suggests increasing the share of Black physicians in military medical facilities leads to better outcomes for Black patients.
The Do No Harm study takes issue with the findings by alleging several flaws, including that Frakes and Gruber’s "The Effect of Provider Diversity on Racial Health Disparities: Evidence from the Military" measures changes in health outcomes when patients are transferred to bases with different proportions of Black doctors, but argues it never directly measures whether Black patients treated by Black doctors fare better than those treated by non-Black doctors.
The report stresses that the authors’ design looks at facility-level shares of Black physicians rather than one-to-one patient-doctor racial matching.
Frakes and Gruber appear to be focused on using their own biases to fuel political action and shape policy in ways that they see fit. A flaw this report fails to mention: These men are ECONOMISTS. So, part of their "concern" probably ties into how many patients can be farmed into certain facilities for the maximum dollar; this is not exactly an unbiased study, and Do No Harm rightly pushes back on it.
Do No Harm argues that the new study appears designed to influence judicial and policy debates, noting that Frakes and Gruber themselves say their findings could shape discussions about affirmative action in medical school admissions amid pending court decisions.
We already know DEI-engineered policies, especially in something as personal as healthcare, do not work. But corporate arms are still very intent on pushing them out, regardless.
In a press release, Do No Harm summarizes their critique into three core problems with the study: it never actually tests whether Black patients fare better when treated by Black doctors, it downplays findings showing Black patients achieve their best outcomes when treated by non-Black doctors at facilities with more Black physicians, and it relies on speculative explanations for those results while failing to rule out non-racial factors that could account for the outcomes.
"We cannot allow politically motivated activists to push debunked racial theories that have no positive impact on patient care," Jay Greene, director of research for Do No Harm, said in the press release.
"Studies like this are designed to codify DEI doctrine to pave the way for re-establishing affirmative action and enshrining race-based hiring. The report ignores the very question it purports to answer: whether black patients actually fare better with black doctors. Our report systematically exposes the study’s shoddy methodology and baseless conclusions. Americans of all races and backgrounds deserve high-quality medical research, not political ideology disguised as science."
It is social engineering and nothing more. From anecdotal experience, the majority of practitioners I have encountered in my almost 60 years of life have been mid- to absolutely terrible — it doesn't matter what their ethnicity, color, or sex. Whether they are nurses, nurse practitioners, doctors, or phlebotomists, male, female, white, Black, Asian, Indian, or pink, what I have personally encountered is an increasing level of disregard, a tone deafness, and too often ineptitude. Lately, this seems to be a feature, rather than a bug. That doesn't even factor in what these medical practitioners' political leanings may or may not be, which could factor in to how — or whether — they will even treat you at all. As my colleague Becky Noble said in her terrific piece on the medical "professionals" who pledge to Do Harm to anyone who is MAGA or right-of-center who comes into their ER or practice:
The problem is that you can't identify these nutjobs on sight. If we think that these people are going to tone it down anytime soon, try stepping into an emergency room with a MAGA hat on and see what happens. If you dare.
Read More: Social Media Provides Sickening Proof of Just How Far Left Healthcare Has Become
Is It Time for a Pro-MAGA Network of Healthcare Providers?
My search continues for even decent providers, so perhaps I'll wear my MAGA hat on my next office visit to test the waters. It would be a first step, but it still does nothing to help you know whether the practitioner is interested in actually providing you with care or just wants to fill the role of intersectional warrior, check their boxes, and collect their fee.
It wasn't always this way. Forty years ago, during my prime childbearing years, I had a terrific gynecologist. Dr. G was a white woman, so one DEI box checked (/sarc). Dr. G was an exceptionally insightful listener, and the knowledge she passed on helped my understanding of her processes. Dr. G also had a great sense of humor, which smooths the waters in any uncomfortable medical space. Most importantly, Dr. G paid attention to what I needed and didn't try to push unnecessary drugs or procedures. Sadly for her patients, but happily for her, she gave up her practice to raise her children. Totally respect that, especially since this was still a time when a female professional who made this choice was often seen as a sell-out to feminism.
One wishes the abysmal menagerie of gynecologists that followed had made that choice. Every last one of them has made me lose respect for the profession. I was single for a long time, and as a Christian, was not sexually active. One gynecologist, another white female, was simply floored by this (not in a good way), and asked me questions for five minutes unrelated to my health. Guess she skipped the medical training on boundaries. Years later, when I was married and contemplating children, I had one Asian female gynecologist say sarcastically, "You aren't really thinking about having a kid at your age, are you?!" Needless to say, I didn't give her a return visit.
The BEST care our family ever received was through a concierge medicine clinic in Southern California. Dr. M, who headed the clinic, was American-born but of Persian descent. When my husband, Lynn, fractured his wrist on a job site, Dr. M actually stayed past his office's closing hours so he could see us. Thank God, Lynn's workplace had excellent workers' comp insurance, so Dr. M put him in a soft splint, gave us a great referral to a well-respected (and expensive) orthopedic surgeon, and that surgeon took it from there to evaluate, further stabilize, and rehab Lynn's wrist. But because of Dr. M's caring manner and attention to detail, we both kept him as our primary caregiver for as long as we were in the area. Dr. M did concierge medicine for a reason: He wanted to be connected to actual patient care and their lives, not just ram through numbers in order to meet insurance requirements. Dr. M said something to me that revealed his passion, and what made him such an exceptional doctor: "I want to spend time improving people's quality of life, not managing their deaths."
This reflects what has gone wrong with medicine; somewhere along the way, we have lost the plot. I have recently discovered, since crossing the threshold from middle-aged to senior citizen, that I am not only invisible, but whatever I say gets disregarded for how they already want to treat me. The practitioners I have encountered may ask the questions, but they don't really care about the answers. Along with the push for diversity, equity, and inclusion in the medical field, the new training also appears to be to do whatever corporate sponsors tell them is the best avenue.
Dive Deeper: Author of New Book Says DEI Isn't Going Anywhere at America's Med Schools
As opposed to the last century, people like Dr. G and Dr. M now appear to be the exceptions, rather than the rule. We will see what changes the Department of Health and Human Services and the National Institute of Health might bring to reverse the trajectory in medical schools and the training medical personnel receive. However, it doesn't change the current landscape, and frankly, it makes what is deemed medical care more frightening than facing the actual disease.
Caveat emptor rules the day.
Editor’s Note: Do you enjoy RedState’s conservative reporting that takes on the radical left and woke media? Support our work so that we can continue to bring you the truth.
Join RedState VIP and use the promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your VIP membership!
Join the conversation as a VIP Member