hahahaha, you’d have to ask someone smarter than me!

i actually don’t see race as a proxy but a misleading social construct

it is significant work to tease out the actual variables, but it’s worth the work to make actual associations (or recognize the lack of association) rather than invent associations/discordances that perpetuate inequity

right, it’s not always visible bc colorism and racism are separate -isms; also, being from Africa does not identify a clear “race”

educating patients on their risk for conditions is essential, but education about these risks should be based in evidence, not carried on from (however well meaning) racist categorizations

use origin/travel, nutrition/supplementation, behaviors, etc to ID risks—these span “racial” categories

race (not real) has no correlation w country of origin (real)

country of origin (& even smaller regional commonalities like zip code) may have patterns based on cultural characteristics, disease epi, and health access, but even those may not be consistent

the concept of race isn’t necessary to understand that less melanated skin is at higher risk for UV damage—that’s true regardless of someone’s ‘background’

i hadn’t! but i did read it and sent it to my bureau director too

my goodness lol 😆

i agree! i do find it useful for identifying references, but i almost never trust the extracted and summarized text because it’s not infrequently misleading or plain wrong! i do use it nearly every day tho to find papers about what i’m trying to understand lol — always read the primary literature!

this!

this statement is too broad! there are so many different genres doing great things right now — are you pretty open?

okay king! go off

omg real eggs in this economy? ID could never