Race and Reification in Science
In my opinion, the argument in this text is very reasonable. In fact, it is one of the important conversations science needs to have concerning medicine. ‘The fallacy of misplaced correctness’ ~ Alfred North; just because it makes sense, does not make it right. I believe we scientists should always know that there is more than meets the eye. Scientists should be separate from the empirical world’s belief during their research. So, the main argument becomes, is there real scientific proof that categorizes race during drug prescription. Differences in the heart-related diseases between Caucasians and African Americans indicate proof.
Isosorbide Dinitrate and Hydralazine(BiDil) was found ineffective in treating the general population. However, in this concentrated population, it showed positive results. Whether or not this is a legitimate discovery is what is on trial today. The name of the company that conducted this study is NitroMed. According to them, African Americans between 45 and 64 years old are 2.5 times more likely to develop heart problems. However, there is a huge discrepancy to this data. First, the age group they studied only accounts for 6% of heart failure mortality. Second, all their arguments do not hold for patients above the age of 65. Their facts only apply to a small bracket of the population. I believe this is the most important part of the text; where we get to see how it does not add up.
A study showed data that proves darker African Americans have higher blood pressure. Many would ask, why that question? Are we simple that everything is just a question of race? This cannot be the new norm of the scientific world. For all that science has done for the modern world, we need to remain pragmatic. As I mentioned in the beginning, the empirical world’s rules should never govern science. If they did, I wonder if Einstein would have existed. A man who has defined and inspired a lot of the modern-day science. This is one of the major concepts of the paper. The questions we ask lead us to the discoveries we make. So, why that question?
If the modern world was to subscribe to this paper’s thinking, I believe we it would be better for science. Then, it would really be free from the empirical way of thinking. If the FDA were to approve this drug, there would be a domino effect. A lot of other discoveries would be made along these lines. In the world of science, ‘Blacks’ and ‘Whites’ would actually be different – and we would be accepting that.
My reactions to the BiDil are of utter disbelief. Race cannot be the phenotype that distinguishes us. I believe that would mean that we are simpler than trees. We don’t categorize trees on account of their colour or region. Why do the same for our own kind? Genetics is a deep field that has progressed a lot over the years. It must be genetic markers that inform these decisions. If not, then I must say that we would be moving backwards.
As stated explicitly in the paper, BiDil needs more work. They have to make it so that it is not administered on account of race, so it does not become the first ‘racial drug’. Because it will not be the last of its kind, and I’m not talking about just medicine.