Social justice advocate and law scholar Dorothy Roberts has a precise and powerful message: Race-based medicine is bad medicine. Even today, many doctors still use race as a medical shortcut; they make important decisions about things like pain tolerance based on a patient’s skin color instead of medical observation and measurement. In this searing talk, Roberts lays out the lingering traces of race-based medicine — and invites us to be a part of ending it. “It is more urgent than ever to finally abandon this backward legacy,” she says, “and to affirm our common humanity by ending the social inequalities that truly divide us.”
TEDTalks is a daily video podcast of the best talks and performances from the TED Conference, where the world’s leading thinkers and doers give the talk of their lives in 18 minutes (or less). Look for talks on Technology, Entertainment and Design — plus science, business, global issues, the arts and much more.
Find closed captions and translated subtitles in many languages at
Follow TED news on Twitter:
Like TED on Facebook:
Subscribe to our channel:
Link do Vídeo
yet more racially charged toxic drivel from the lefties.
I completely agree with the lecture. Medicine has played a key role in the construction of race and racism. Therefore, it is necessary to deconstruct knowledge and the medical view, which continue to maintain the colonial slavery legacy.
hilarious
Thank you 💕💕💕💕💕💕💕💕
Feel less pain and have more muscle? Sounds like slavery justification and myth, sick
Do you notice all the dialysis clinics popping up all over the place. AA can not be the face of dialysis
She's right – race medicine is bad medicine. But the reason physicians don't lead the effort to end it is because they benefit from not ending poverty and discrimination. The status quo is why they have power, so they will not work to end it.
There are certain factors where race does make a difference, for example, people with higher melanin / darker skin are better protected against UV radiation but more at risk of vitamin D deficiency, especially if they live at higher latitudes. However, it shouldn’t be assumed that just because you’re black you have a vitamin D deficiency.
Why race and not ethnicity?
I never check any boxes for ethnicity/race.
Ah, this is gonna make the reconstructionists so mad…
I reckon the speaker doesn't know a whole lot about modern medicine. Its based I a bio-psycho-social model of the individual and as long as race plays an essential social role it will rightfully play an important role in medicine. Its not the choice of doctors what society cares about, they have to work with what they got.
This video was beautiful. Thank you, Doctor Dorothy Roberts!
For effective treatment, cant physicians distribute medicine with the general which have higher probability? Race medicine is more effective than consolidating medicines which are not categorized and medicine's act are medical treatment, not PC. It's just a way of reducing the percentage of disadvantage. there is nothing wrong with categorizing race for increasing the percentage of effective treatment and if the patients want, they have the rights to choose any. Like, we dont say that headache medicines are racist because it is not diagnosed with individuals. If you have a headache, you jst get a pill+if you want better percentage on treatment by following the generals you have the rights to choose from the headache pill categorized by race. Im pissed off that IB schools show this video for grades.
Did the people that disliked this video even watch it?
This was mind blowing! I have been a Nurse for over 20 years. I knew we were being treated differently within the hospitals, but could not put it into words. I am going to do more research. I love the way she had facts/evidence to support her statements. You can not be upset with this. Shame on the medicine industry. Kudos to Dorothy Roberts.
Beyonce is more muscular than Ronda Rousey according to racists
Doesn't really sound like aomwthing widespread today
Race morning NFL should be bankrupt. Bitches
She Admits there are differences racially but because of the Social Inequalities…. but until these social inequalities are extinguished, the race based "guesstimates" are the best doctors can really do unless they want to dig into each patient individually and drive medical costs even higher.
She's correct, by diagnosing and treating people based on race, physicians are not treating them as individuals with their own set of symptoms, medical history, family history and ancestry. They are treating them based on some racial stereotypes.
This is what you get when Arts grads act as if they're empirical scientists and understand anything about the scientific method
She literally contradicts herself and makes logically fallacious statements repeatedly and never once provides any evidence to support any of her nonsense fantastical claims other than her paltry argument from her own biased authority.
1:17 that because you visibly appear more black than white. Very rarely can half African Americans pass for white, but sometimes. If you are white fully and your dad is black or mom is, that's a rare thing, but it happens. This girl is probably like 60 percent Caucasian if one parent is African American, they have a lot of British ancestors.
Race is indeed mostly a social construct, but it is a medical fact that different races are susceptible to different diseases, etc.
THIS IS SO TRUE EVERYTHING SHE'S SAYING IS TRUE….. THE MEDICAL AND PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANIES ARE BIAS AND RACIST AF
Ignorant people are afraid of what they can't grasp! If they don't understand something its got to be bad.
Lovely talk .. Thanks Dorothy , the hatred for black people is real doesn't seem to surprise me any longer . They are interested in the Natural resources from Africa and also exploiting black talent .
This is what every doctor needs to learn to heal the disease and end the illness of hate.
There are different versions of the C-19 vax based on race.
She is powerful! So many people don't even realize how races even came to be. Ignorance
Also, why are we listening to a lawyer talk about biology?
Family history….I guess that is why we ask when a patient cannot afford to wait or pay for genetic testing. Turns out you are not as black as you think you are but sickle cell anemia definitely comes from Africa. When a patient cannot tell family background and cannot pay or wait for genetic testing…the cheap option is to ask. Race based medicine is important and yes liver levels in all African Americans is different than it is Caucasian Americans. P.s. we treat women differently in medicine than men too. It'd be great to test hormone levels and other factors first but….. Wanna talk vitamin D levels by melatonin in the skin next?
This is absurd
i am amazed at the amount of dislikes on this video, those who cant "believe" that this occurs on a daily basis are blind to the society we live in. HUMANS are HUMAN that's it, it's that simple and if you aren't on the train towards progress then i think you missed your stop about 500 years ago.
She is talking about a true problem in the medical field. But using sensationalism to explain why it's wrong. Give me number and facts, but I do admit that her spirometry statement was very good. But many of her statement are a bit inaccurate.
ممنون برا زیر نویس پارسی،🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻💯🧿♥️❤️💞🌷🌹😍🥰🤩🇮🇷🇮🇷🇮🇷🇮🇷persia
Thank you so much!!
Thank you for the video. It is very important to understand that and to explain that too. Thank you for your research.
Thank you for addressing this issue.
Shocking to know that such racial based prejudice still persists.
And OF COURSE there will be loads of dislikes on this video.
Oh well, great talk Ms. Roberts ❤
“Automatically assume I have more muscle mass than that female body builder”. 1) They don’t cause the body builder isn’t average. 2) makes sense black people are more muscular than anyone. Look at professional sports. 3) if you think this is a remotely accurate statement you evidently do not possess the intelligence to have authority on anything medical
Treating individuals differently based on race has led to some of the most atrocious human rights violations in history, so it is incredibly important to discuss how race is used in medicine and evaluate whether or not its use is warranted. Dorothy Roberts’ overview of race-based medicine brings with it at least one accurate critique. Her example that that racial stereotypes can lead physicians to prescribe fewer pain medications to African-Americans and Latinos with long bone fractures when compared with Caucasian patients has validity and one that physicians must work to fix. However, many of her arguments seem to confuse “use of race” with “racism.” Merriam-Webster dictionary states that racism is “a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race” (https://bit.ly/2gA53Hm). Using race in a way that injures patients could certainly be categorized as racism, but what if the evidence-based use of race benefits the patient?
In medical ethics, one of the core principles of care that guide physicians in their treatment of patients is the concept of beneficence. Beneficence is the moral obligation to always act in a way that benefits the patient. If research has shown that race is a factor in the contraction of a disease or condition, the physician has a moral obligation to include race in their screening method for the benefit of the patient.
There are many race-based associations that have been made using evidence-based research methods. For example, the prevalence of hypertension is higher in African American populations than in Caucasian populations (https://bit.ly/2QcKQGx). This knowledge allows doctors to educate their African American patients and teach them that their bodies retain sodium at a higher rate, enabling them to change their diet to decrease their sodium intake if they would like to lower their risk for cardiovascular disease. For patients that are of Ashkenazi Jewish descent, physicians can recommend tests that can identify Tay-Sachs disease due to its high prevalence within that sub-population.
Someday, genetic testing may reach a point where all risk factors for diseases can be surmised from a patient’s unique DNA. For now, eliminating race from patient care is premature and risks hurting patient care because it removes a valuable positive correlation that benefits patients.
“The Problem with Race Based Medicine” by Dorothy Roberts discusses how despite the fact that race is almost wholly biologically irrelevant, it can greatly influence an individual’s healthcare. Doctors are tasked with and entrusted to know a large amount of information. One way in which clinicians manage this challenge is to categorize patient test results and corresponding treatment by characteristics such as age, BMI, race, and so on. Race, unlike the others mentioned, is a social construct that is chosen by the patient based upon what they most closely identify with. Roberts states that race is “a crude, but convenient proxy for some greater factor,” citing certain tests indicate different parameters depending on the race of the patient. This statement is supported by Richard Lewontin, who surmises that race is often mistaken for heritage. If doctors are basing treatment off of a construct that does not accurately represent a patient’s genetics, this could lead to the improper allocation of resources. In these cases, patients may be deserving of treatments that precedent denies them. Roberts uses the treatment of long bone fractures as an example of the implications of race based medicine: Black and Latino patients were significantly less likely to receive pain medication than white patients with the same injury. Here, one would expect these groups to have received relatively similar levels of resources – in this case, pain medications. Rather, resources were not allocated justly because standards of care were based on “stereotypes that black and brown people feel less pain, exaggerate their pain, and are predisposed to drug addiction.” This systemic bias could prevent even the most impartial physicians from fulfilling the beneficence of the patient. That’s not to say that medical guidelines should be disbanded entirely. Rather, as Roberts suggests, guidelines should be based directly upon the [greater factors] such as muscle mass, or other appropriate physiological conditions. Admittedly, we may have to wait for genomic medicine to advance. Clinicians use race is to represent certain hereditary factors that can be determined only through sequencing that is not readily available. However, short cuts that are more biologically pertinent are still preferable. Physicians would be able to more accurately provide treatment in the best interest of the patient and more adequately allocate resources. Further, self-identified race may not be entirely clinically inconsequential because the “inequities caused by racism” are so extensive. For example, race could give some information as to the social pressures an individual has experienced. In this context, a clinician could gain a small amount of understanding in regards to the psychosocial aspect of the patient. Race is not an adequate biological indicator in healthcare and should not be included in medical guidelines nonetheless. Without this bias, clinicians will be more likely to deliver patient care in a manner that properly allocates resources and is congruent with beneficence.
I would like to start by thanking Ms. Roberts for tackling a very important, timely and sensitive issue. In her discussion about race-based medicine, Ms. Roberts is addressing one of the four ethical principles followed by the medical community – justice. As healthcare providers, every physician vows to treat their patients with justice, that is to say, with fairness regardless of differences in race, social or economic status, etc. To pledge justice is to pledge fair and equal distribution of resources and treatments among all groups of patients. Ms. Roberts essentially argues that race-based medicine violates this ethical principle because certain racial groups like African Americans and Latino/as are subject to biases/stereotypes.
However, genetic background can actually play a major role in disease risk and prevalence. Because it is not quite feasible to test everyone’s genome, physicians deduce this genetic background by asking for patients’ race. Race is one of many tools to help determine how to best screen, evaluate data, or make a diagnosis for a patient. This brings up another important ethical principle of beneficence – acting in the patient’s best interest. Knowing the race of an individual is a piece to the diagnostic puzzle and truly helps physicians do the most good for the patient. For instance, Tay-Sachs disease is more prevalent in the Ashkenazi Jewish population, African American males are at greater risk for prostate cancer, and those of the African descent have a higher frequency of sickle cell anemia. If you knew you were at a greater risk for a disease based on your racial/ancestral background, wouldn’t you want your physician to be aware of your background so they could help to better monitor, diagnose, and treat you?
I understand Ms. Robert’s dissonance with having to check a box for race – as this must be especially confusing and seemingly inappropriate for someone of mixed racial descent. Perhaps asking a patient to list ancestral background (instead of being forced to check one box) would be a possible solution to this problem. Doctors may need to be more transparent with patients and explain the importance of knowing the ancestral background – this knowledge is ultimately for the benefit of the patient.
I have the utmost respect for Ms. Roberts and her work with the important and sometimes controversial topic of race in medicine. This is clearly an issue that affects many aspects of the doctor-patient relationship and I think it warrants continued discussion and study.
I appreciate the enthusiasm with which Ms. Roberts is confronting the difficult issue of inequalities within medicine regarding race. Unfortunately, I believe her efforts are misdirected in this case. A key Tennent of medicine is that doctors must abide by the principle of non-maleficence, that they will not harm patients, physically or psychologically. For those who have experienced racism first hand, a race-based drug could make someone weary, mistrusting, and inflict more psychological harm. I won’t pretend to know that feeling and am open to hearing more from those who have suffered through it and their views on this topic. The problem here is that by focusing in on a couple of instances where the inclusion of race into medical diagnostics may not be justified, she attempts to discredit the many real instances where it is immensely valuable. It would be both irresponsible and immoral, disregarding the promise of non-maleficence, for a physician to disregard valuable science to avoid appearing racist. Doctors have a moral imperative to help heal their patients, along with a legal obligation. If a doctor was examining a young child with Ashkenazi Jewish heritage who was displaying neurological deterioration, should they not be more inclined to strongly consider Tay Sachs disease? It is well documented that the HEXA gene is far more likely to be mutated within that population (https://www.genome.gov/10001220/learning-about-taysachs-disease/). It should not be racist to use facts, and there absolutely is a scientific precedent for practicing race-based medicine. If doctors did not utilize every tool at their disposal to help patients, they could become dangerously close to being negligent. A few factors define medical negligence. A physician simply not doing what you would expect a physician of average skill and competence to do is one of them.
Ms. Roberts stated race-based medicine cannot be a substitute for evidence-based medicine. Race-based medicine is not inherently distinct from evidence based medicine and are often one in the same. There was no basis to claim BiDil marketing meant African-American physiology was deemed inferior, so the medication would not work as well on other races. Different does not equate to inferior, and that is a dangerous association to make. That is really the point we should be making to irradiate true racism. I did enjoy her final statements, and I agree that using race as the “quick and dirty” method for physicians should not be enough. We should dig deeper and look at the reasons behind the differences. Do more research into the exact genetic variations that cause the different outcomes we observe. In the meantime, however, we should treat patients with all the resources and information we have available. There are many places where racism in medicine is a real problem, and Ms. Roberts addressed a few of them. Those are the areas where I would love to hear more about the issues and solutions. Denying genetic variations amongst individuals and general population trends takes the focus away from where our efforts could truly make a difference.