The Week in Woke

Joy Reid retweeted -- "amplified," as they say -- a race-grifter claiming "Jingle Bells" is, get this, racist.

Remember, you are the ones engaging in "racial grievance" when you say you're sick to death of being endlessly scapegoated for black failure.

Joy Reid is spending December amplifying a claim that "Jingle Bells" is racist, reposting a video to her 1.3 million followers that tries -- and fails -- to turn one of America's most familiar Christmas songs into a racial flashpoint. The clip she chose to boost offers no proof, only speculation and academic flair that collapse the moment you examine the song's history or even read the lyrics.

The video leans on the fact that composer James Lord Pierpont served in the Confederacy and had written minstrel tunes earlier in his life. But none of that makes "Jingle Bells" itself racist, and the video never demonstrates otherwise. Background isn't evidence, and Reid's repost doesn't provide any. It also highlights a Boston plaque claiming Pierpont wrote the song "to make fun of black people," and cites an assertion that its first public performance -- then titled "The One Horse Open Sleigh" -- may have taken place in blackface in 1857. Even if that performance involved blackface, that reflects the entertainers, not the content of the song.

And the content is indisputable. The original lyrics -- widely available -- aren't about race, caricature, or anything remotely tied to minstrelsy. They're about sleigh rides, winter spills, young flirtation, and the carefree joy of youth.

A new report finds that injecting people with superphysiological levels of artificial hormones increases their all-cause mortality.

Wow, I did not see that coming. I mean, yes I knew this would kill people, I just didn't think that anyone in "The Science (TM)" would dare to do any actual science about trans mutilations.

Biology in Medicine
@biologyinmed

It is not only the HHS report warning of the irreversible long term risks of Oestrogen used as a cross sex hormone.. A new study reports:

Known risks
- cardiovascular disease
-infertility
-pulmonary embolism
-stroke
Emerging 'warning signals' of increased risk
-early mortality
- pancreatitis
-testicular, thyroid and breast cancer
-autoimmune disease

Prescribing of cross sex hormones in children and young adults must be stopped.

The paper is here.

Remember that alleged study that proves we need DEI? The one cited by Justice Ketangi D-EI when arguing for DEI forever?

The study claimed that white doctors kill black babies.

That turns out to be bunk -- fake science -- but what is even more interesting is that the same study found that the death rates of white babies increased when attended by black doctors. In other words, following the logic of the "study" -- we need black doctors for black patients, but also, white patients must also not have black doctors. White patients need white doctors.

You might be thinking, Wow, I never heard anyone cite that part of the study.

That's because the "scientists" who did this study omitted that part of their findings from their published paper, because they didn't want to "undermine" the "narrative" they were trying to establish.

The August 2020 study in the prestigious Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) concluded that the gap in mortality rates between black newborns and white newborns declines by 58% if the black newborns are under the care of black physicians. A possible driver of the phenomenon could include a "spontaneous bias" by white physicians toward the babies, the researchers wrote.

The paper's most high-profile booster was Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, who cited it as evidence for the benefits of affirmative action in her dissent in the 2023 Supreme Court ruling Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, which found that universities that considered the race of college applicants had violated the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

"For high-risk Black newborns, having a Black physician is tantamount to a miracle drug: it more than doubles the likelihood that the baby will live," reads an amicus brief filed by the Association of American Medical Colleges. "Yet due to the enduring and significant underrepresentation of minorities in the health professions, many minority patients will not receive care from a racially diverse team or from providers who were trained in a diverse environment."

CNN @CNN

Black newborn babies in the US are more likely to survive childbirth if they are cared for by Black doctors, but three times more likely to die when looked after by White doctors, a study finds. https://cnn.it/347NlE1

Aug 18, 2020

But the study's methods have been called into question. A September 2024 replication effort concluded that the original study authors did not statistically control for very low birth weight newborns at the highest risk of dying. Applying that control zeroed out any statistically significant effect of racial concordance on infant mortality.

Now, evidence has emerged that the paper's lead author buried information in order to tell a tidier story than the one his methods and data originally illustrated.

A key data point was edited out of the body of the paper, apparently because it muddled the downstream policy implications of the study, according to documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act by the nonprofit Do No Harm, which opposes identity politics in medical research and clinical practice.

The study originally asserted that white babies died less frequently with white doctors.

"White newborns experience 80 deaths per 100,000 births more with a black physician than a white physician, implying a 22% fatality reduction from racial concordance," an unpublished draft reads.

But the study's lead author Brad N. Greenwood wrote in the margin: "I'd rather not focus on this. If we're telling the story from the perspective of saving black infants this undermines the narrative."

"That's not how scientists speak," Ian Kingsbury, director of research at Do No Harm, told the Daily Caller News Foundation. "It's not a smoking gun, but it's certainly suggestive they were pushing one narrative or another."

The data point was axed.

"Concordance appears to bring little benefit for White newborns," the paper reads.
While omitted in the paper's body, the data point can be found in the appendix as part of a logistic model. Unlike the linear regression highlighted in the paper, a logistic model is more appropriate for binary questions like whether a newborn survives or dies, according to Ted Frank, a senior attorney with the Hamilton Lincoln Law Institute, which filed an amicus brief in favor of Students for Fair Admissions.

Greenwood, the Maximus Corporate Partner Professor of Business at George Mason University, wrote another note to his coauthors that may indicate he had a predetermined desired conclusion, a strong correlation between physician race and clinical outcomes, the FOIA documents suggest.
...

The study has been cited 507 times in the scientific literature. But the study has made a big impact outside of academia too.

Published in August 2020 amid the Black Lives Matter protests, the study has generated more public discussion in the laypress and on social media than 99% of scientific studies published in the last five years, according to Altmetric. The study has received coverage in 340 outlets including CNN, USA Today, and the Washington Post.

Hank Johnson, the forefather of the field of Buoyant Tectonic Plate Theory -- that Guam may "tip over" if too many people immigrate there --- declares that America is, just as radical Iranian hate-mullahs say, "the Great Satan."

Guys, if we end DEI then it will be white men who suffer the most.

The Washington Post says so.

The horror:

Stacked rapper Nicky Minaj is ripping Newsom:

posted by Ace at 05:28 PM

| Access Comments