Commentary
DEI panel: Do No Harm is a threat, CRT popularity is declining
Share:

Panel exposes their own racism and error-filled assertions
On May 30, the American Medical Association (AMA) sponsored a panel event with National Health Equity, “Advancing Health Equity Through Resistance: A State of the Union on Threats and Opportunities.”
AMA is one of four Founding Collaborators who developed the National Health Equity Grand Rounds series. This particular event was hosted to push back against Do No Harm and others who are challenging DEI requirements in medicine, and who present as “threats” to the DEI agenda.
Do No Harm is the Biggest Threat to DEI
When asked of the biggest threat to advancing Critical Race Theory (CRT) and anti-racism in medicine, panelist Khalil Gibran Muhammad, PhD specifically named Do No Harm and its founder Dr. Stanley Goldfarb. As an academic, Muhammad claims he and other anti-racists are “more sophisticated in understanding how these things work.”
But while the Harvard Kennedy School professor incorrectly discounts Dr. Goldfarb’s level of engagement on the issues, (note: you can access dozens of Do No Harm’s Reports and Research here), it is ironic that his project, Institutional Anti-Racism and Accountability Project (IRA), is only a “qualitative study based on semi-structured interviews.” He also admits that “looking at applied research in this field (DEI) is a fairly new thing.” (27:59)
Scientific inquiry and quantitative data don’t harmonize with the DEI agenda. Alternately, as medical professionals at Do No Harm, science is our specialty. We will always fight for facts to triumph over political propaganda.
CRT is the Least Popular Message
Ian Haney López, MA, MPA, JD, who teaches seminars on Critical Race Theory at Berkeley Law admitted his allegiance: “I am a critical race theorist.” (15:07). The tenets of Critical Race Theory are that: racism is normal and ordinary and not the exception, that racism is inherent in every structure in America, and that people of color are continually discriminated against and treated unfairly in both the public and private spheres including law, medicine, and education.
Interestingly enough, Mr. López said according to his own data and large national studies, the least popular political message among communities of color is the narrative of structural racism—exactly what CRT teaches. (35:42).
“The least popular message, political message, among communities of color (is) ‘There’s a lot of structural racism (and) we need to make this country live up to its ideals.’”
López goes on to say that the CRT theories promoting victim mentality aren’t working either.
“And a lot of people in communities of color hear a story in which they have to accept that they are hated and that their children’s lives are truncated because they’re hated by the dominant group in society. And they don’t want to hear that message,” López said. (37:51)
López doesn’t understand the reason they don’t want to hear that message, is because the message is flat-out untrue. (Or possibly, he thinks the majority just lacks the aforementioned sophistication to understand these issues).
CRT isn’t working because it’s untrue. Understandably, no individual of any race wants to be taught that they are hated and being held down by powerful invisible forces. Yet this is the bedrock of CRT.
López is a career-critical race theorist. Academics like him and these DEI panelists have invested so much time and energy into the CRT religion, and are now discovering (but have the inability to accept) that this wasn’t the hill to die on. But instead of abandoning CRT and anti-racism as a means to keep power, they are doubling down. López sounds like he’s stuck in the sunk cost fallacy.
So what does he propose, as a career-critical race theorist? To keep believing in CRT but to change the communication strategy. He’ll continue believing and teaching falsehoods but manipulate it in a way to deceive the general public.
The single most popular political message López says, is about building power across racial lines to take care of our families. (37:12). So, naturally he recommends using this talking point instead of structural racism to gain more followers, blind to the real CRT agenda. The arrogance and hypocrisy are astounding. We invite Mr. López to abandon CRT as a life mission and join our cause in treating everyone as an individual. Science says that when new data is available, it changes our approach. Your data has proven CRT doesn’t work, and it isn’t accepted. It has done more harm in society than positive change.
DEI Panel’s Own Racism
The ironic part about anti-racism is the fact that it is itself, racist. López defines racism as “white over non-white,” (15:39), but true racism is the belief that each race has distinct and intrinsic attributes based solely on their skin color. Racism also asserts (like Ibram X, Kendi does) that the only remedy to past discrimination is present discrimination.
The panel often exposed their own racism and biases during the event. Michelle Morse, MD, MPH, is the Chief Medical Officer at the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene. At the event, Morse told hospital communications and PR staff to refuse to answer questions about health equity projects to “right-wing” media, instructing staff to say, “I’m not responding to this white supremacist news outlet.” (32:49).
Defaming an entire news organization as a “white supremacist” is a flagrant strawman argument, only exposing the accuser (Morse) of bias herself. At the introduction of the event, the moderator asked the audience to come with “an open heart and an open mind.” Yet, when asked questions by a free press (protected by the 1st amendment), Morse’s modus operandi is to shut down discussion and hurl fallacious insults.
Morse also advocates for black patients to be placed higher on kidney transplant lists, if the previously standard algorithms of the eGFR test didn’t indicate kidney disease.
Multiple studies and data prove that serum creatinine concentrations are higher in black individuals than those of any other race, which informs the standards and algorithms for the eGFR. Morse implied these clinical algorithms didn’t fit the DEI agenda, so they intended to “change the algorithms.” (34:55).
Morse says, “Now there are ways to use race to advance racial equity, but many of these clinical algorithms unfortunately are not using race in that way.” (34:47). It’s incongruous that she is happy to use race to her advantage when it suits the DEI agenda, but not when the data opposes that agenda.
Most terrifyingly, the efforts to change these algorithms was largely “led by students and trainees,” and not by research. Morse also admitted “well we can’t wait” for research to lead the change in algorithms. (35:02). The change in science she promotes was not led by rigorous, systematic study, but by DEI ideology.
Additionally, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) is proposing incentives for hospitals to create health equity plans and prioritize transplants for certain races above others.
Dr. Goldfarb responded to this CMS proposal, stating, “Eliminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it, especially in medicine. The Supreme Court has made clear that CMS may not enlist private actors to discriminate against patients based on race, even to reduce disparities.” He advocates patient-education as another solution rather than race-based discrimination.
So yes, we’re proud that the work Do No Harm has achieved is a threat to CRT and anti-racism. We are emboldened further to not let DEI’s erroneous, racist, political agenda take over medicine and medical education. And we’re proud to fight against the intellectual elites who have tried to commandeer the narrative and force their harmful political agenda. We pledged to “first, do no harm.”