Stethoscope,On,Laptop,Keyboard.,Medical,Continuing,Education,Courses,Concept

Professional Development in Healthcare is Succumbing to Wokeness – and ACEHP is Leading the Way

,

The Alliance for Continuing Education in the Health Professions (ACEHP) is an organization for healthcare educators, offering support and resources for their professional development offerings and activities, including continuing medical education (CME). However, ACEHP is doing its part to drag the delivery of healthcare continuing education into the endless abyss of DEI and anti-racism.

As it demonstrated during its recent annual conference (sponsored in part by CME providers such as Talem Health, Healio, and CME Institute), ACEHP’s idea of best practices includes a “DEI Showcase” of woke topics.

‘Emerging’ at the Alliance 2023 Annual Conference (ACEHP Almanac, February 7, 2023).

Examples of the February 7, 2023, sessions include:

  • Are We Committed to DEI Progress or Are We Committed to DEI Notoriety? Dr. Russell Ledet urged attendees to learn how medical conditions appear “in people of color as opposed to white people,” and discussed how DEI progress appears versus “what is just for clout.” To “make DEI progress from a CME perspective,” Dr. Ledet recommended Harriet Washington’s book on Medical Apartheid (which says that experiments within certain black populations is “a tradition that continues today”) and The 1619 Project (which claims America’s founding was not in 1776, but based on the year slaves arrived in Virginia) as helpful resources.
  • Infusing Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Anti-racism [DEIA] Concepts Into the Fabric of Continuing Education. As the institution that “is leading the important conversations on DEIA,” the University of North Texas Health Science Center at Fort Worth presented a “learning lab” for incorporating DEIA concepts into the planning, delivery, and evaluation phases of continuing medical education. The session aimed to “foster the critical thinking and self-awareness of the participants” with case studies that encourage the application of DEIA principles into mission statements, planning committees, and CME program operations.   
  • Panel Discussion on Education that Improves Inclusive Healthcare: Lessons From a Program Focused on Cancer Screening and Care for Transgender Individuals. The presentation included “examples of DEI education that changes “healthcare professional] behavior.” In addition to a Q&A with the panel, this session presented clips from the documentary “Trans Dudes With Lady Cancer.”
  • Learning Collaborative – Driving Equity Through Awareness: Addressing Social Determinants of Health and Disparities in Care in Medical Education. Panelists advised attendees on methods to incorporate health equity information into their continuing education offerings, and how to discuss “challenging” topics with patients so they “feel more comfortable and trust their healthcare professionals.”

Policy & Medicine, a website that reviews and writes about healthcare-related regulatory and compliance issues, endorsed the conference, particularly the day dedicated to health equity. While praising the objectives of the sessions, their coverage included a curious reflection. “We must know more than that there is an issue and develop a plan,” the author said, “to ensure everyone is treated with dignity and respect and deliver the care patients deserve.”

Yet this is not the message of DEI activists, who push an ideology that declares the healthcare industry is systemically racist and certain groups of practitioners must be trained to recognize and mitigate their implicit biases. ACEHP and its members need to apply the standards of dignity, respect, and competent patient care delivery to the field of continuing professional development instead of redefining the meaning of best practices and creating discord in the healthcare industry.

Is your professional healthcare organization promoting divisive ideologies instead of adhering to the mission of providing competent patient care? Do No Harm wants to hear from you, and you may remain anonymous if you wish.

Analyzing,And,Gathering,Statistical,Data.,Growth,Charts.,Many,Business,Reports

Lies, damn lies, and statisticians: A transgender paper that fails the test

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Economist Ronald Coase observed that “if you torture the data long enough, it will confess to anything.” A paper recently published in PLOS One devised some particularly creative means for extracting a confession.

The authors of “Anti-transgender rights legislation and internet searches pertaining to depression and suicide” claim to observe “that the passage of a single [anti-trans] bill led to around a 13 to 17 percent increase in the volume of searchers for the word ‘suicide’ within that state.” Moreover, they said “that for every anti-transgender bill passed in a week, there was about a five percent increase in searches for the word ‘depression.’” They assert that the increased interest in these terms reflects increased mental health distress, brought on by legislation.

The researchers derive their conclusion from multiple regression analysis, a technique used to observe the relationship between a dependent variable (searches for “suicide” and “depression”) and multiple independent variables (the status and timing of “anti-trans” bills). Google searches constantly fluctuate for a variety of reasons, so simply observing whether searches increase or decrease in the wake of new legislation would not sufficiently address the researchers’ question. Indeed, sophisticated analysis is required to attempt to isolate the potential effect of new legislation on internet searches.

While sophisticated quantitative methods are useful tools for serious scholars who pursue truth, they can also be used by activist scholars to create the aura of “science.” It is easy to deceive readers who are uninitiated to the nuances of quantitative methods. And sure enough, a technical deep dive of the PLOS One paper reveals that its methods are flawed on their merits, rendering the conclusion invalid.

Only a limited number of health policy scholars have the statistical skillset required to interrogate the paper’s approach, including, perhaps the peer reviewers and editors at PLOS One. But even reviewers or editors not well-versed in statistical methods should assess whether a research paper passes a face validity test. The extent to which this new paper fails that test is staggering, which makes its publication particularly disconcerting.

The relationship between two phenomena (i.e., the timing of “anti-trans” bills and Google searches for “suicide” and “depression”) can only be observed to the extent that the items vary. It would be impossible, for example, to estimate the effect of sunlight on plant growth if it was cloudy or sunny 100% of the time. Herein lies a major issue with their dataset: Only two “anti-trans” bills were passed within their study time horizon, and both were in Idaho on the week of March 22, 2020. Given this limitation, face validity demands strong evidence that the bills in Idaho were in fact associated with an increase in searches for “suicide” and “depression.” At the very least, unsophisticated examination should track with their conclusion to verify that it isn’t simply derived from tortured data. Instead, Google Trends indicates that the adjusted number of searches in Idaho that week for the word “suicide” (derived by taking the frequency of a specific search term, dividing it by the total number of Google searches and then normalizing the results relative to a peak of 100) was below average for Idaho compared to the year overall, and aligned with national trends.

Figure 1: Adjusted volume of Google searches for “suicide” in Idaho (blue) and the United States (red) in 2020.

Searches for “depression” in Idaho were also consistent with national data, and just slightly above the state average for the year.

Figure 2: Adjusted volume of Google searches for “depression” in Idaho (blue) and the United States (red) in 2020.

Put simply, the single data point that allows the researchers to make an inferential analysis tells a different story from the conclusion they attempt to torture from it.

It’s bad enough that the variables don’t have the relationship the authors try to impose upon them. But it should also be noted that the timing of the Idaho bills’ passage casts serious doubt about the wisdom of empirical analysis. The week of March 22, 2020 coincided with the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, which dominated news headlines and disrupted nearly all facets of life. “Anti-trans” bills can only provoke feelings of suicide or depression if individuals are aware of and thinking about such bills. Amidst a historic, spiraling public health emergency, would legislation that prohibits gender changes on birth certificates or forbids biological men from competing in girls’ sports have wide resonance with Idahoans? One should be skeptical.

Finally, even if the legislation was associated with an increase in searches for the terms “suicide” and depression” (it wasn’t), and even if Idahoans were in fact mindful of the new legislation (a questionable proposition), there’s another problem. Someone who prioritizes empirical rigor might wonder whether the search results are, in fact, a proxy for mental health distress, or whether they are an artifact of media coverage of the legislation. Transgender activists and their allies in the academy and media repeatedly make the erroneous claim that their policy objectives would curtail the high incidence of depression and suicide in trans-identifying youth. Consequently, it’s plausible that Google searches for “suicide” and “depression” increase in response to media-driven interest in the topic, not mental health distress. The authors never address this possibility nor attempt to disentangle it in their analysis.

Whether this paper was produced out of sloppiness or an attempt to advance a cultural objective is unknown, but the effect is all the same: More junk science obfuscates rather than informs debates around gender topics.

Closeup,Selective,Focus,Of,Massachusetts,State,On,A,Geographical,And

UMass T.H. Chan School of Medicine Scores 70.8% on its DICE Inventory – And is Promoting a Discriminatory Summer Internship

Just how woke is the University of Massachusetts (UMass) T.H. Chan Medical School? Very woke indeed, as it just confirmed to Do No Harm.

Here’s the background. In November 2022, the Association of American Medical Colleges released a report showing that the vast majority of medical schools have embraced identity politics, despite their divisive and even discriminatory nature. The report was based on surveys of specific medical schools, which the AAMC didn’t name.

For the sake of transparency and accountability, Do No Harm submitted freedom of information requests to public medical schools nationwide, including the UMass Chan Medical School. We asked for a copy of its survey response, so that Massachusetts taxpayers and policymakers could learn the truth about this institution.

Here’s what the UMass Chan Medical School has self-reported:

  • It has adopted racially discriminatory admissions practices under the guise of “affirmative action.” This means it’s potentially lowering standards in the name of diversity, thereby threatening patient health. The schools list of selection criteria includes:

“Attributes that contribute to the diversity of the class, including, but not limited to, socio-economic background, educational background, work experience, nationality, languages spoken, ethnicity, race, gender, gender identity, and sexual orientation. Also considered in diversity are students from disadvantaged backgrounds and resiliency in terms of positive capacity to cope with stress and adversity.”

  • It has a “dedicated office, staff, or resources” dedicated to DEI. This means there’s a permanent woke bureaucracy pushing ideology on faculty and students. The UMass Chan Medical School Diversity and Inclusion Office says it is “moving toward an equitable and anti-racist future.”
Figure 1. UMass School of Medicine Diversity and Inclusion Office.

The Diversity and Inclusion Office also sponsors the Emerging Professionals Summer Internship program, which includes racially discriminatory selection criteria that treats certain racial/ethnic groups differently than others. Do No Harm has filed a federal civil rights complaint against the university for this violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

  • It lobbies for woke policies at the federal, state, and/or local levels. This means it’s wading into toxic public debates instead of fully focusing on educating future physicians.
  • It offers tenure and promotion to faculty who prove their commitment to extreme identity politics and woke priorities. This is a litmus test that requires faculty to toe the party line instead of teaching medicine at the highest level. The Diversity and Inclusion Office’s position on recruiting says the UMass Medical School is “committed to a program of affirmative action to eliminate or mitigate artificial barriers and to increase opportunities for the recruitment and advancement of qualified minorities, women, persons with disabilities, and covered veterans.”
  • Its administrators are active within local, regional, and national forums to promote equity, diversity, and inclusion. This means it’s wasting resources that would be better spent on real medical education.
Figure 2. UMMS DICE Inventory overall score.

All told, the UMass Chan Medical School has instituted 70.8% of the divisive and discriminatory woke policies listed by the AAMC. And you can bet it is feeling pressure from activists and outside groups to go even further down the radical rabbit hole – doing even more damage to faculty, medical students, and ultimately, the millions of patients they’ll see.

Massachusetts taxpayers help fund UMMS. They, and the policymakers who represent them, should ask why they’re giving so much money to an institution that’s putting divisive and discriminatory ideology at the heart of medical education. More importantly, they should ensure UMMS stops, and soon.

A,View,Of,Philadelphia,,Pennsylvania,Skyline

UPenn Only Wants Woke Medical Faculty

,

Want to work at UPenn’s Perelman School of Medicine? First, you have to prove how woke you are. This blatant political litmus test is now part of the faculty job application process. This prestigious institution is just the latest to put divisive ideology ahead of excellence and merit in its hiring process.

A tipster clued us into this disturbing turn of events at UPenn. Applicants for teaching positions must now submit a “Diversity Statement,” which is exactly what it sounds like: A statement proving their commitment to the divisive and discriminatory concepts of “Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion.”

UPenn doesn’t want rhetoric. It wants applicants to show their track record on DEI: “In general terms, diversity statement should include past experiences and activities, and also future plans to advance diversity, equity, and inclusion.” The application guide asks a series of leading questions, too:

  • What does diversity mean to you, and why is this important?
  • Do you understand the university’s diversity goals?
  • What have been some of your experiences either being part of a non-majority group, or interacting with diverse populations?
  • How has your thinking about diversity actively influenced your teaching, research, and/or scholarship?
  • In thinking about the different roles you have played, and will play, as part of your university service, what role has/will diversity issues play?
  • What role do you believe that advising and mentoring play in working with diverse populations?
  • Does your engagement with diversity help students prepare for careers in a global society?

The list goes on. The application guide even provides a sample “Diversity Statement,” which lists things like publishing articles on DEI, teaching “equity” in the classroom, and other blatantly woke activities.

The UPenn mandate applies to every part of the university. Yet when it comes to the Perelman School of Medicine, the inevitable result will be harm to medical educators. They must either pretend to believe in these blatantly political ideas or actively subscribe to them, making them less suited to actually teach at the medical school. Political orthodoxy is not a legitimate qualification for teaching, yet by pretending it is, UPenn will do great harm to medical education.

Meriden.,Connecticut.,Usa

The Connecticut General Assembly’s Fight Against Systemic Racism in “Endo…What?”

The Connecticut legislature wants to ensure its school nurses can detect systemic racism in students’ uteruses.

Rep. Jillian Gilchrest of the Connecticut General Assembly has been busy during the 2023 legislative session, including co-sponsoring legislation prohibiting the sale or barter of dead kangaroos, mitigating climate change, and introducing a bill promoting “equitable holidays” for state employees. But one proposed bill recently gained attention on social media: An Act Concerning Endometriosis Training for School Nurses.

HB 6297 says that school nurses and those serving in school-based health centers must be required to receive “(1) Endo What? School Nurse Training and Toolkit” and “(2) training on endometriosis that includes information on systemic racism, explicit and implicit bias, micro aggressions, racial disparities, anti-blackness, and experiences of transgender and gender diverse youth.”

Figure 1. HB 6297, Connecticut General Assembly 2023.

Moving past the fact that one must be trained and certified as an advanced practice nurse to diagnose and treat a medical condition, the provisions of this bill are facially absurd. Having spent several years of my nursing career in rural New Mexico, I gained a wide variety of experience in the field, including school nursing. I can confidently state that none of the students who came into the office said that their tummy aches or menstrual cramps were due to systemic racism or implicit bias. Working as an operating room nurse during many hysterectomies, there was no way to distinguish the race or ethnicity of the uteruses once they were in the specimen container. And, during multiple medical and surgical treatments for endometriosis as a young woman, my doctors never attributed the problem to “anti-blackness.”

Said one tweet about the Connecticut bill: “All that oppression in one uterus.”

Let’s demand more from our lawmakers who are proposing legislation in the name of public health. School nurses have more important topics to study for their continuing professional development. Most of all, children need protection from radical ideologies, not the promotion of them.  

Laura L. Morgan MSN, RN is the program manager for Do No Harm.

Greetings,From,Texas,Vintage,Rusty,Metal,Sign,On,A,White

The UT Health Long School of Medicine Cleans Up Its Discriminatory Scholars Program

We recently reported that the University of Texas Health (UT Health) Long School of Medicine (LSOM) in San Antonio was under investigation for its racially discriminatory Diversity in Medicine Visiting Elective Scholars Program. The program’s eligibility restrictions required applicants to “identify as one or more of the following underrepresented backgrounds: Black/African American, Hispanic/Latinx, American Indian/Alaskan Native, Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander.” Discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin is prohibited under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. After being informed that a federal civil rights investigation was opened by the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR), UT Health LSOM scrubbed the website, claimed the program no longer exists, and “that any mention of the Program on its website was inadvertent.” An archived version of the web page can be accessed here.

OCR dismissed the case on February 7, stating:

The University provided OCR documentary evidence reflecting that the scholarship at issue in this case has been changed so that it is now available for visiting students, regardless of gender or race. Specifically, the webpage for the scholarship indicates that it is an opportunity for “individuals from disadvantaged backgrounds, who are committed to working with underserved populations, or are interested in working with issues related to diversity, equity, and inclusion.”

The evidence provided to OCR by UT Health Long School of Medicine is not publicly available. A search of the UT Health LSOM website and its Office for Inclusion and Diversity failed to locate any reference to the program, and the link to the original posting still shows “page not found.”

Do No Harm continues to fight back against discrimination in academic scholarships and programs. If your school offers a scholarship with eligibility criteria that are based on race/ethnicity or sexual orientation/gender identity, please let us know.

California,State,Logo,,Emblem,,Label.,The,Golden,State.,Print,For

UCSF Fresno Responds to Civil Rights Investigation of a Discriminatory Scholarship

The U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) opened an investigation into The University of California San Francisco (UCSF) Fresno for its racially discriminatory Obstetrics and Gynecology Scholarship for Visiting UiM Students – 2022 (archived page here), as we reported last December. The scholarship’s application confirmed that the program was intended to support students who are “underrepresented in medicine,” and asked for the applicant’s race/ethnicity.

Figure 1. UCSF Fresno OB/Gyn Scholarship for Visiting UiM Students application (archived version, September 28, 2022).

In response to OCR’s federal civil rights investigation, UCSF Fresno changed the name of the program to “Obstetrics and Gynecology Scholarship for Visiting Students 2023,” which is reflected on its webpage. The original eligibility requirements stated:

To qualify for this scholarship, you must identify as UiM** (** UIM includes a member of the LGBTQ+ communities or underrepresented minorities as described by the California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development which includes: Black, African Americans or Africans, Hispanics or Latinos, American Indians, Native Americans or Alaskan natives, Native Hawaiians or other Pacific Islanders, and Asians (other than: Chinese, Filipinos, Japanese, Koreans, Malaysians, Pakistanis, Asian Indian, and Thai).

The updated eligibility requirements now state:

To qualify for this scholarship, you must Identify as a student from a Disadvantaged Background** (**Family with an annual income below established low-income thresholds AND/OR from a social, cultural, or educational environment such as that found in certain rural or inner-city environments that have demonstrably presented barriers to navigating admissions or access to medical careers.).

The 2023 application also contains the restructured language, and information on the applicant’s race/ethnicity is no longer collected. However, it leaves the door open for the applicant to “further explain the circumstances of your ‘disadvantaged background’” as an optional response.

Figure 2. Current application for the UCSF Fresno OB/Gyn Scholarship for Visiting Students 2023.

As a result of these changes, the San Francisco Office for Civil Rights has determined the case is resolved.

Have you been excluded from a scholarship or fellowship program due to discriminatory eligibility criteria? Do No Harm wants to hear from you.

DNH_StaffThumbnail_January2x

Meet January Littlejohn, Parent Advocate

January Littlejohn is a wife and stay-at-home mom to three children in Tallahassee, FL. She has a master’s degree in counseling and is also a licensed mental health counselor.

Her 13-year-old daughter was socially transitioned at her middle school in 2020 without her knowledge or consent. In 2021, she and her husband filed a federal lawsuit against the school district for parental rights violations.

Most of her free time is devoted to educating parents, school officials, legislators, and mental health professionals on the dangers of gender ideology and the affirmation only approach in medicine. She also helps parents whose children have fallen prey to this ideology find resources and treatment options to support their family.

Hear January’s story:

Oklahoma,(u.s.,State),Flag,Waving,Against,Clear,Blue,Sky,,Close

Why Isn’t OSMA Protecting Kids?

The Oklahoma State Medical Association doesn’t care about vulnerable children.

That’s the unavoidable takeaway of OSMA’s recent announcement that it opposes several bills in the state legislature that would protect children from dangerous transgender medical procedures by restricting so-called “gender-affirming care.” Why is the organization that represents Oklahoma physicians putting extreme gender ideology ahead of children’s health and well-being?

OSMA’s opposition couldn’t come at a more awkward time. This week, a whistleblower at a Missouri children transgender center went public with the de facto child abuse she witnessed on a daily basis:

“I left the clinic in November of last year because I could no longer participate in what was happening there. By the time I departed, I was certain that the way the American medical system is treating these patients is the opposite of the promise we make to “do no harm.” Instead, we are permanently harming the vulnerable patients in our care.”

The whistleblowers described children being given puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and even referrals for sex-reassignment surgeries. She also saw how these treatments led to severe medical issues, including infertility, and were given without question to children suffering from major mental health issues. Such is the nature of the “gender-affirming care” that OSMA wants to maintain.

Figure 1. From “Medicine Day 2023” announcement (Oklahoma State Medical Association).

OSMA may be completely in thrall to transgender activists, but its members know better. One member sent us the following note:

“I have been an OSMA member for many years. I just got my dues renewal and I will not – I cannot – send them money this year because they’re hurting kids by opposing this legislation. They need to stop politicizing their approach to medicine without regard for patient safety or wellbeing. They are doing so without the support of the members they represent and I can no longer be a part of dangerous pseudomedicine.”

We couldn’t agree more. The Oklahoma State Medical Association should focus on medicine, not radical gender ideology. And the state legislature would be wise to restrict transgender treatments for children as soon as possible. The health and well-being of vulnerable Oklahoma children depend on it.

Is your medical association advocating extreme ideology? Please let us know – securely and anonymously.

BCBS cover

BlueCross BlueShield of North Carolina’s Foundation is Funding a Racially Discriminatory Grant

,

We received two anonymous tips about the Advancing Healthy Food Equity initiative at the BlueCross BlueShield of North Carolina (BCBSNC) Foundation. This program, which is “part of an overall commitment to increase equity access to healthy food,” offers the opportunity for ten organizations to receive $300,000 over three years. But here’s the catch: Only non-profit organizations with specific race/ethnicity-based characteristics are eligible. Here’s what the BCBSNC Foundation requires of these non-profit entities to be considered for funding: “Led by, serving, and accountable to American Indian, Black, Latino, other People of Color, and members of immigrant communities that have been impacted by inequities in access to healthy food.”

To provide clarity on the grant’s background and eligibility criteria, BCBSNC Foundation held an informational webinar on January 31, 2023, which reiterated the standards that must be met:

  • The executive director or CEO is American Indian, Black, Latino, other Person of Color, or from an immigrant community.
  • The community served is primarily American Indian, Black, Latino, other People of Color, or members of immigrant communities as demonstrated by the demographic of those directly impacted by an organization’s programming.
  • The staff, board, or coalition leadership reflect the community served.

However, Healthy Food Director Merry Davis wanted to ensure that the criterion for the CEO of the applying organization was crystal clear:

We have received questions about eligibility from organizations that have a majority people of color staff, and staff leadership, and white CEO. So given the spirit of this opportunity Sheila and I shared earlier, these organizations are not eligible for this particular opportunity.

The BCBSNC Foundation further defines its commitment to promoting equity over equality in its Racial Equity Commitment for “addressing structural racism and creating more equitable opportunities for health.”  

Figure 3. BCBSNC Foundation’s Racial Equity Commitment.

The Foundation claims that health equity means “a fair and just opportunity to be as healthy as possible.” But what is fair and just about excluding specific groups of people from access to healthy food on the basis of race and ethnicity? And just because an otherwise eligible organization has a CEO whose race happens to be white, it can’t be considered? North Carolinans and BlueCross BlueShield members need to ask the BCBSNC Foundation why they are funding a racially discriminatory grant program.Have you seen healthcare-related grant opportunities with discriminatory eligibility criteria? Please let us know via our secure online portal.

A,Transgender,Flag,Being,Waved,At,Lgbt,Gay,Pride,March

We Need More Trans Whistleblowers Like This One

Have you personally seen the disturbing reality of transgender treatments for children? A new whistleblower from Missouri did – and she’s saying this blatant child abuse needs to stop, now. Do No Harm hopes more whistleblowers will speak out and join the fight to protect vulnerable children.

The Missouri whistleblower’s story is powerful:

I am a 42-year-old St. Louis native, a queer woman, and politically to the left of Bernie Sanders… [It] led me to a job in 2018 as a case manager at The Washington University Transgender Center at St. Louis Children’s Hospital.

I left the clinic in November of last year because I could no longer participate in what was happening there…Instead, we are permanently harming the vulnerable patients in our care… and what is happening to them is morally and medically appalling.

She describes how quickly her colleagues recommended irreversible treatments, without any regard for counseling or even basic medical science:

Frequently, our patients declared they had disorders that no one believed they had. We had patients who said they had Tourette syndrome (but they didn’t); that they had tic disorders (but they didn’t); that they had multiple personalities (but they didn’t). The doctors privately recognized these false self-diagnoses as a manifestation of social contagion…

To begin transitioning, the girls needed a letter of support from a therapist—usually one we recommended—who they had to see only once or twice for the green light. To make it more efficient for the therapists, we offered them a template for how to write a letter in support of transition. The next stop was a single visit to the endocrinologist for a testosterone prescription. 

That’s all it took. 

She saw the horrifying consequences constantly:

When a female takes testosterone, the profound and permanent effects of the hormone can be seen in a matter of months. Voices drop, beards sprout, body fat is redistributed. Sexual interest explodes, aggression increases, and mood can be unpredictable. Our patients were told about some side effects, including sterility.

But after working at the center, I came to believe that teenagers are simply not capable of fully grasping what it means to make the decision to become infertile while still a minor. 

This brave whistleblower deserves credit for speaking out – and surely she is not alone. If you’re a medical professional or parent who’s seen children subjected to radical gender ideology, including extreme treatments, please let us know. We’ll help you tell your story – and protect more children.

Journal,And,Eyeglasses

Why Does This Medical Publisher Need To Know Your Race?

The publisher behind The Lancet, one of world’s most prestigious medical journals, wants to know the race and gender of all its peer reviewers. Do No Harm reviewed the details, which are deeply concerning. This beacon of medical scholarship is fixated on race, when it should be fully focused on medical research.

The publisher is Elsevier, and its demands for reviewers are blunt. Before a medical educator or scholar can review a study being considered for publication – the tried-and-true process known as “peer review” – they must first fill out a diversity survey. If they refuse, they are not allowed to continue with their review. Apparently, their expertise doesn’t matter if they don’t first disclose their skin color.

Reviewers can choose from a variety of racial classifications, and if you answer “White,” you are further directed to choose “Western European” or “Eastern European.” The survey states, “You are not expected to undertake DNA testing, nor to use the results of such a test as your basis for answering.” It also says: “Selecting one’s racial identity as ‘white’ should not be misconstrued with nor is indicative of white supremacy in any way.” Yet it still sends the message that white reviewers are somehow biased and therefore unwelcome as reviewers.

How is Elsevier using this racial data? Its woke bureaucracy-babble doesn’t give a straight answer. The publisher says: “Your self-reported diversity data will be used to improve diversity and inclusion across journal editorial processes,” and “if there are opportunities to further advance inclusion and diversity, such as by enhancing outreach, we aim to take action to adopt them.” This raises the question of whether Elsevier is moving to ban or solicit scholarly reviewers based on race.

Such is the nature of woke ideology in health care. It inevitably leads to racial discrimination, while sending divisive messages to scholars and experts. The Lancet and Elsevier’s other medical publications are supposed to promote the best medical research. So why are they increasingly obsessed with race?

Have you seen discriminatory woke ideology at a medical journal or in medical research? Please let us know – securely and anonymously.

Arkansas,-,United,States,Of,America,State,-,Usa,-

Wokeness Is Gaining a Toehold In Arkansas Medical Education

The Alice L. Walton School of Medicine (AWSOM) opened in 2021 with a degree program “that integrates conventional medicine with holistic principles and self-care practices.” Problem is, the school is also integrating wokeness into its recruiting and hiring processes.

Prospective faculty members seeking a position at AWSOM are informed that, in addition to their curriculum vitae and a statement on their teaching philosophy, they will be required to submit a “diversity statement.”

Figure 1. From the “Join Our Team” page at AWSOM.

One of the available positions is for an Assistant Dean of Inclusive Excellence in the Office of Faculty Affairs and Inclusive Excellence:

The Assistant Dean of Inclusive Excellence will work with school leaders to build and guide a team of staff charged with building and fostering a diverse, inclusive, equitable work and learning environment such that our faculty, students and staff can thrive. Areas of responsibility include but are not limited to developing, leading and guiding the development of a DEI plan, facilitate training programs, advocate for policies, programs and processes that enhance our diversity, increase our strength, and ultimately result in excellence. In short, this person will work to create and sustain a professional and inclusive culture/climate. We are building a workplace and learning climate in which inclusive excellence and whole health principles are inextricable parts of our culture and practices.

It’s to be expected that a woke medical school would require its “inclusive excellence” dean to be “committed to diversity and inclusion.” But what about other faculty positions? A Physiology Faculty opening says the ideal candidate will be responsible for curriculum development and instruction of students with “demonstrated experience and expertise in medical education.” Yet, this position is expected to take the same DEI pledge.

AWSOM isn’t finished with infusing DEI into every corner of the school. The Director of Facilities Services, which is responsible for the management of building operation, mechanical systems, and environmental services, is also required to submit a Diversity Statement and meet the DEI commitment skills requirement.

Figure 2. From AWSOM Director of Facilities Services job posting.

AWSOM isn’t expecting its first class to start until 2025, but it is taking measures to ensure the DEI agenda is teed up and ready to go for students, faculty, and even the plant engineer. The residents of northwest Arkansas need to decide if they want wokeness or wellness in their new doctors.

ABFM6

This Is What Passes As “Continuous Knowledge” at the American Board of Family Medicine

The American Board of Family Medicine (ABFM) offers Self-Assessment and Lifelong Learning in a number of topics that many physicians use to obtain and maintain their family medicine board certification. Individual modules in the “Knowledge Self-Assessment” section also provide continuous medical education (CME) credits to maintain a medical license. One such tool is the Continuous Knowledge Self-Assessment (CKSA). Launched in 2017, the CKSA delivers 25 multiple-choice questions to the ABFM member portal on a quarterly basis throughout the year.       

Do No Harm obtained a copy of a recent practice question on the CKSA:

A 13-year-old who was assigned female at birth has been diagnosed with gender dysphoria. His parents fully support their child and affirm his gender as male. One examination the patient has a sexual maturity rate of Tanner stage 3. Which one of the following steps would be appropriate for optimal support and therapy for this patient?

The appropriate approach is to conduct psychosocial assessments, followed by family counseling. None of the answer choices reflect the course of action that is aligned with a family physician’s duty to minimize the risk of harm to the child, rather than prescribing “gender-affirming” treatments. While incorrect, the most conservative response is “Recommending delaying any gender-affirming treatment until he is at least 18 years old to prevent adverse psychosocial outcomes of puberty suppression.”

Figure 1. Practice question on the ABFM CKSA.

However, the ABFM has a different idea of appropriate care for children, and the answer is appalling. The CKSA shows “recommending GnRH analogue treatment” (puberty blockers) as the correct choice for this question.        

Figure 2. ABFM’s indication of the correct answer to the CKSA practice question.

Why is the ABFM endorsing the use of puberty blockers in children? Even if commonly cited guidelines are accepted by the physician, this is still an erroneous response. The World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) guidelines, which the CKSA cites, lists the summary criteria for adolescents. The first intervention listed is “a comprehensive biopsychosocial assessment including relevant mental health and medical professionals” (WPATH Standards of Care for the Health of Transgender and Gender Diverse People, version 8, appendix D).

Figure 3. From WPATH Standards of Care, Version 8.

The ABFM’s rationale for this answer says it refers to the WPATH guidelines and asserts there is “consistent evidence” in the treatment of “gender incongruence.” Adolescents who receive puberty blockers, it says, “have improved mental health outcomes,” so family physicians must “recognize the indications for timely treatment or referral.” The explanation goes on to say, “Puberty suppression is reversible,” and prescribing it “allows transgender adolescents, their families, and the care team to determine appropriate gender-affirming care as the patient approaches adulthood.” Plus, the references they use are flawed, as noted by the Society for Evidence Based Gender Medicine (SEGM) in a recently published study.

Figure 4. Rationale for the ABFM’s correct answer.

But it gets worse. The final paragraph of the rationale states:

It is unethical and against recommended guidelines for a physician to attempt to convert a person’s gender identity to the sex assigned at birth.

Figure 5. Rationale for the ABFM’s correct answer.

In other words, the ABFM is compelling family physicians to agree with prescribing so-called “gender affirming care” to minors as the correct answer on its practice exam and self-assessment for members.

Doctors who are taking advantage of the continuing education resources the ABFM is giving them are being coached with incorrect information regarding the safest course of treatment and advocating for preventing harm to their adolescent patients with “gender dysphoria.” The ABFM holds all the power with family physicians who are seeking the credential of board certification. They, and others who are committed to protecting children from potentially catastrophic harm, are the ones who must fight back against this alarming stance by the American Board of Family Medicine.

Is your accrediting or certifying organization pushing gender ideology? Please let us know via our secure portal. You may remain anonymous if you wish.

Page – Membership

a:9:{s:8:”location”;a:2:{i:0;a:1:{i:0;a:3:{s:5:”param”;s:4:”page”;s:8:”operator”;s:2:”==”;s:5:”value”;s:2:”10″;}}i:1;a:1:{i:0;a:3:{s:5:”param”;s:13:”page_template”;s:8:”operator”;s:2:”==”;s:5:”value”;s:23:”template-membership.php”;}}}s:8:”position”;s:6:”normal”;s:5:”style”;s:7:”default”;s:15:”label_placement”;s:3:”top”;s:21:”instruction_placement”;s:5:”label”;s:14:”hide_on_screen”;s:0:””;s:11:”description”;s:0:””;s:12:”show_in_rest”;i:0;s:8:”modified”;i:1711560204;}

Screen Shot 2023-01-03 at 12.36.00 PM

A Truly Disgusting Display in a Nursing Continuing Education Webinar

In November 2022, Dr. Stanley Goldfarb published Maternal Mortality in the U.S. – Media Narratives and Reality to explain the metrics and reporting systems used in the United States that contribute to maternal mortality rates that are higher than in other developed nations. But not all presentations on this topic are intended to bring clarity to maternal health concerns.

Planned Parenthood of Central and Western New York, in collaboration with the Rochester Black Nurses Association (RBNA), hosted a virtual discussion for Black Maternal Health Week titled Unpacking Racial Disparities in Maternal Health Outcomes and Identifying Solutions. However, it quickly became clear that “identifying solutions” wasn’t even close to being on the agenda.

Celia McIntosh, one of the founders of the RBNA, presented “Black Maternal Health: The Tragic Truth.” McIntosh, who is a neurology nurse practitioner, set the tone early by quoting a statement from Malcolm X about “the most disrespected…unprotected…neglected person in American is the black woman.” Her response was, “Fifty years later, that still rings true.”

Figure 1. From “Black Maternal Health: The Tragic Truth” by Celia McIntosh.

In addition to the “social determinants of health” that are commonly cited, McIntosh included “other community factors that play here: Police, laws, property, racism.” When discussing education as a contributing factor, she stated, “Higher education still does not improve racial differences in maternal mortality, and is not protective for black mothers in the way that they are for white women.”

Figure 2. From “Black Maternal Health: The Tragic Truth” by Celia McIntosh.

McIntosh went on to list other problems in the care of black mothers, such as “nurses not answering call bells” and “making slick, smart remarks, not responding to their questions.” And, of course, “structural racism” is included, because “all roads essentially lead to racism when you start looking at the literature.”

Figure 3. From “Black Maternal Health: The Tragic Truth” by Celia McIntosh.

She continued by providing examples of “women impacted by maternal mortality,” such as:

  • Felicia West died in 2019 of a stroke and she was told by a provider, “Ok, we will…it will be a while before I can see her because I have a lot of patients.”
  • Kira Johnson died in 2016, leaving two children and a husband behind; died of postpartum hemorrhage and basically her husband was told, “Sir, your wife just isn’t a priority right now.”

McIntosh followed those statements by declaring “the system is rigged” because education and improved access to healthcare are not viable solutions. “There’s something inherently wrong with the system that’s not valuing the lives of black women equally to white women,” she said.

Near the conclusion of her presentation, McIntosh displayed “a little picture I found on Facebook” which depicts doctors in white coats and hoods standing over a woman in a bed. “We talk about the KKK with the police,” she explained, “but we need to also talk about the KKK in the hospitals and the doctors.”

Figure 4. From “Black Maternal Health: The Tragic Truth” by Celia McIntosh.

Is this really what maternal health professionals are looking for in continuing nursing education? Is a nurse practitioner who doesn’t even practice in the field of obstetrical nursing qualified to present the “evidence” related to maternal health? Is displaying a repulsive KKK cartoon an effective method for opening a dialogue and “identifying solutions?” Of course not. Activists like McIntosh are using their platforms to promote divisive and inflammatory messages that only contribute to the pool of misinformation.

Have you seen an over-the-top presentation in your healthcare continuing education courses, virtual discussions, or professional seminars? Do No Harm wants to hear from you – securely and confidentially.

Civil,Rights,And,Gavel,On,A,Table.,Law,And,Legal

These Civil Rights Violations Are Shocking – Even for the University of Washington

, , , , , , , ,

A federal civil rights complaint has been filed against the University of Washington School of Medicine (UW Medicine) for illegal discrimination and segregation with its Affinity and White Antiracism Groups. By offering this affinity group program, UW Medicine is violating Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972.

The complaint was filed with the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights by Mark Perry, senior fellow for Do No Harm, and included an email from Dr. Paula Houston, Chief Equity Officer in the UW Medicine Office of Healthcare Equity. The email, addressed “To the UW Medicine Community,” invites faculty, staff, and students to join one or more of six new groups. Membership to five of the groups are based on race/ethnicity or sexual orientation/gender identity. The “White Antiracism Group (WAG)” session are “for white colleagues who want to support our collective work to become a more equitable, inclusive, and antiracist organization.”

Figure 1. Information regarding Affinity and White Antiracism Groups at UW Medicine.

Additional information and registration for the WAG is available from the Office of Healthcare Equity on its website.

Figure 2. White Anti-Racist Groups information from UW Medicine Office of Healthcare Equity.

The WAG groups are scheduled to meet several times through mid-June, with the first meeting on February 15, 2023. “WAGs are important as an explicit opportunity for our white colleagues who want to stand in solidarity with and support our BIPOC colleagues,” the description states. The description also confirms the intent to segregate group members based on race/ethnicity or sexual orientation/gender identity:

The Office of Healthcare Equity will be convening affinity groups for our Black, LatinX, Asian and Pacific Islander, and LGBTQIA colleagues, to provide supported and protected spaces for members of different groups to connect and support each other.

In the complaint, Perry cites Title VI regulation section § 100.3 (b iii) Discrimination prohibited, which expresses that “Subject[ing] an individual to segregation or separate treatment” on the basis of race, color and/or national origin is strictly prohibited. The “White Antiracist Groups” are a clear violation of federal law. Perry’s complaint calls for an investigation of UW Medicine for this violation, as well as the Title IX violation for segregating faculty, students, and staff on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity.

Have you seen affinity group activities at your school or workplace that support segregation of students or employees in violation of federal law? Do No Harm wants to hear from you – securely and confidentially.

COA1

The Governor’s Institute in North Carolina Pushes Wokeness Onto Addiction Medicine Professionals

The Governor’s Institute in Raleigh is a non-governmental organization founded by former North Carolina governor James Martin. It serves as a continuing medical education (CME) resource for healthcare professionals in the discipline of addiction medicine. One of those resources is a bi-annual Addiction Medicine Conference, funded by state and federal health services administrations. Do No Harm obtained a copy of some of the materials presented at the April 2022 conference, and you won’t believe what passes as “top-notch” CME in North Carolina.

Dr. Jessica Isom, clinical instructor in the Department of Psychiatry at Yale University and owner of Vision for Equity, LLC presented Can You See Us? Providing Equity-minded Treatment for Racialized Minorities at the April 2022 Addiction in Medicine conference. After “naming the elephants in the room” by explaining terms such as “social positionality” and “the centering of a subjugated counternarrative,” Dr. Isom ventured into “the taboo nature of the topic of race, racism, and whiteness.”

Figure 1. From “Can You See Us? by Dr. Jessica Isom.

Dr. Isom provided examples of “the wisdom and insight that can be found” on social media with the images titled What White Privilege in Addiction and Recovery Looks Like and Racism Experienced in Addiction and Recovery. In this illustration, she claimed that racialization in substance use disorder means you are “vulnerable to criminalization if you are not white,” whereas “white opens up doors to medicalization.” She equates the impact of “racialized minorities’” relationship with drugs to “oppression” and “specifically racial trauma.” These include “current race-based manifestations that affect their behavioral health.”

Conference on Addition Medicine, video 1.

Dr. Isom explained that Americans are “socialized” into concepts that are inaccurate, “such as colorblind racial ideology.” CBRI, as she puts it, “will convince you we are in a post-racial society,” but she countered that the roots of the nation’s problems are in structural and cultural racism. “A whole PhD – probably multiple – could be obtained on structural racism,” she stated. “Cultural racism” refers to things like “implicit bias and microaggressions.” She referred to “really big topics” at the bottom of her slide, which are shown as “white supremacy” and “racialized inequities.”

Figure 2. From “Can You See Us? by Dr. Jessica Isom.
Conference on Addiction Medicine, video 2.

The second half of Dr. Isom’s presentation centered on “equity-mindedness.” This concept, coupled with an “organizational commitment to equity,” provides a solution to inequities in the treatment of addiction. This means working on individual “implicit and explicit biases we hold” and “growing our equity muscles” so issues of race and bias issues can be tolerated “without having a meltdown,” she explained.

Figure 3. From “Can You See Us? by Dr. Jessica Isom.

Equity-minded people are “race-conscious, not in race denial,” such as “that colorblind stuff” Dr. Isom previously mentioned. “Race is there. It’s always there,” she said, adding that discrimination “is happening all the time. Every single day.”

Conference on Addiction Medicine, video 3.

In addressing “organizational equity-mindedness, Dr. Isom discussed “racial anxiety and racial stereotype threat” when working with clients. One party might be concerned about experiencing racial discrimination and is experiencing anxiety about that, while the other party might be concerned about confirming “the stereotype that all white people, for example, are racist.” She advised the participants to prepare clients who “don’t have a choice about where they go” that it’s possible that they will receive some “discriminatory treatment.”

Finally, Dr. Isom used an image that suggests racism has an impact on every element of addiction and treatment. “If you want a condensed, concise summary of this topic, this is a good place to start:”

Figure 4. From “Can You See Us? by Dr. Jessica Isom.
Conference on Addiction Medicine, video 4.

The April 2022 Addiction Medicine conference is not the only symposium to promote topics in medical wokeness. The November conference included plenary sessions on “Clinical Strategies that Address Equity” and “Addressing Reproductive Health in Substance Use Disorder Treatment through a Harm-Reduction and Trauma-informed Lens.” The spring Addiction Medicine Conference in March 2023 continues these themes and offers a 90-minute workshop titled “Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Focused Topic.”

Why is the Governor’s Institute promoting and hosting discussions and speakers with materials that push anti-racism and radical ideologies? Addiction medicine professionals and the residents of North Carolina who seek their services won’t benefit from a constant spotlight on racial identity politics as part of the treatment plan.