AMA releases document on appropriate language and health equity

[sloop]

I mean, some things, like book burnings let's say, or allowing torture, may have a clearer path to what you're saying here.

Trying to clean up language for the sake of a traditionally oppressed minority on the other hand....

What if the Nazis had banned the term "Jewish parasite"?

Not all changes in language are leading to a totalitarian state and concentration camps.

Not all changes in language are, but enforced changes in language usually are. And, if you look back at my argument, that has always been my line in the sand. Once you get to a point of compelled speech, that is incredibly dangerous and authoritarian by its very nature.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[doomer_md]

We use terms like diabetic or white cloud fairly often in clinical scenarios.

If the first thing you think of when you hear white/black cloud is skin color then I don’t know what to tell you other than the phrase isn’t the problem, it’s you.

And if someone that’s diabetic is going to let their condition define them, not really my fault? It’s just an adjective, not an indictment.

 

[Crayola227]

Not all changes in language are, but enforced changes in language usually are. And, if you look back at my argument, that has always been my line in the sand. Once you get to a point of compelled speech, that is incredibly dangerous and authoritarian by its very nature.

You have a point here, and certainly could use examples or language that is less extreme so your points can be considered on its own merits.

I think there's a lot one has to consider in the context to determine the dangers.

Whoever said that IF the AMA started censuring based on this, would be a line in the sand, I think is fair. Considering WHO is doing the "compelling" and WHAT the consequences are is important in deciding if motions to change language are getting at the dangers you're talking about.

 

[Crayola227]

If the first thing you think of when you hear white/black cloud is skin color then I don’t know what to tell you other than the phrase isn’t the problem, it’s you.

And if someone that’s diabetic is going to let their condition define them, not really my fault? It’s just an adjective, not an indictment.

But we already established it has little to do with "being the first thing you think about." There is research and points being made about implicit bias. And that's much harder to grapple with. Doesn't mean it doesn't matter either though.

And I pointed out that some people do define themselves by their diabetes, and that's fine if that's a big part of their identity. We're talking about people who feel less comfortable with US defining them that way, not the other way around.

 

[doomer_md]

We're talking about people who feel less comfortable with US defining them that way, not the other way around.

Huh? How else would they find out they are diabetic other than through a medical professional?

There is research and points being made about implicit bias. And that's much harder to grapple with.

The evidence for implicit bias is about has convincing as the evidence phrenology.

 

[Crayola227]

Huh? How else would they find out they are diabetic other than through a medical professional?



This evidence for implicit bias is about has convincing as the evidence phrenology.

You're not clever enough to figure the issue is calling them a diabetic (in this usage, it's not an adjective by the way, but a noun), not diagnosing them as having diabetes??

 

[doomer_md]

You're not clever enough to figure the issue is calling them a diabetic (in this usage, it's not an adjective by the way, but a noun), not diagnosing them as having diabetes??

If a person is fine with the diagnosis of DM why would they be upset about being called diabetic especially by a healthcare worker?

 

[Neopolymath]

If a person is fine with the diagnosis of DM why would they be upset about being called diabetic especially by a healthcare worker?

It would means Americans have to admit they have disease and are unhealthy. They want it both ways as is often the case when interacting with patients in primary care IMO.

 

[deleted1081396]

Again if you have a legit problem with the word "whitelist" how are you going to handle when a patient or patient's family throws real life insulting language at you which anyone who has worked in the real world knows can happen. Are you going to breakdown or move onto the next patient and perform like you should. I think it is horrible if a patient or someone at work does this but are we living in real life land or not? If the words "whitelist and blacklist" are at the top of the list of things to tackle well then dang we are almost living in a utopian society.

Can you leave the AMA once you join? I tried logging into my old account I made as an M2 and I don't think I'm actually a member since the 'Become a Member' button is visible.... Can you be sanctioned by an organization you're not a member of?

 

[Crayola227]

It would means Americans have to admit they have disease and are unhealthy. They want it both ways as is often the case when interacting with patients in primary care IMO.

So I guess you missed the part where an oncology doctor said some people might not like to hear themselves referred to as "the leukemic in bed 4."

I know others who don't want to be called an arthritic. They may talk about having arthritic hands but that doesn't mean they want to be labeled an "arthritic." Also doesn't mean they're in denial and unable to accept their limitations.

Same with being called a "paraplegic."

 

[hamstergang]

If a person is fine with the diagnosis of DM why would they be upset about being called diabetic especially by a healthcare worker?

Let's say the reason is totally irrational. Would you, as a doctor, then continue to call patients "diabetic," not caring if it upsets patients (and therefore likely negatively impacts care) since they're irrational? Or would you make the slight shift in language in order to better outcomes since it costs you only one extra syllable?

 

[Mass Effect]

You use words like “blackmail” with your patients everyday?

No I don't which is why I didn't comment on that word.

 

[Mass Effect]

I'm not defending anything he said. I didn't make the argument. I'm telling him not to bother. You're a psychiatrist with strong training IIRC who just happens to pretend not to understand basic analogies on SDN for some reason so maybe you should both save your energy.

And why would I block a poster, particularly one I find entertaining? It's gonna be ok. We only speak to each other on here like every year or two.

Hold up, just because I find an attempt at an analogy to be inappropriate and inaccurate, it suddenly means that I "pretend not to understand basic analogies?" Says who?? I'm perfectly capable of understanding what the poster was going for and still calling him out on the epic fail that it resulted in.

 

[Mass Effect]

Show me how the logical form wasn’t an analogy. Please do so in a way that does not use loaded, emotional language in an attempt to disguise the fact that you’re not capable of arguing a rational point. I bet you can’t do it. Prove me wrong.

I really hope the culture of SDN eventually shifts because this wave of "if you disagree, you must be emotional" crap is just plain BS. Look, I can call you out without being "emotional", whatever that means. Was I floored? Hell yes. Was I annoyed? Hell yes. Was I disgusted? Hell yes. Sue me, I'm disgusted that you'd invoke Nazis to make a point. That doesn't mean I'm "emotional"; it means I'm human and rightly disgusted by what you posted.

I get your attempt and that's all it was - an attempt at an analogy. The AMA making suggestions to its voluntary members and the physician community at large is in no way, shape, or form at all, by any stretch of the vivid imagination, the same as Nazi Germany or any of things that happened that led to the atrocities of the Holocaust. Not one itty, bitty, teeny, weeny bit. Not at all. It was insulting that you even went there. You did so, not because of accuracy in the analogy, but because you wanted to provoke emotion by taking something so horrid and injecting it into a discussion about something that isn't even a literal blip on most doctor's radar.

 

[Mass Effect]

You have a point here, and certainly could use examples or language that is less extreme so your points can be considered on its own merits.

I think there's a lot one has to consider in the context to determine the dangers.

Whoever said that IF the AMA started censuring based on this, would be a line in the sand, I think is fair. Considering WHO is doing the "compelling" and WHAT the consequences are is important in deciding if motions to change language are getting at the dangers you're talking about.

The thing is, the poster jumped about a billion hurdles to get to "the AMA will censure people and everyone will have to report it to licensing boards". Due to literal RECOMMENDATIONS. These aren't law, they're not even hospital policy. They're recs. It's the actual definition of making mountains out of molehills and screaming your hair is on fire for no reason.

 

[Mass Effect]

Can you leave the AMA once you join? I tried logging into my old account I made as an M2 and I don't think I'm actually a member since the 'Become a Member' button is visible.... Can you be sanctioned by an organization you're not a member of?

Of course not. This is a scare tactic. Ignore and move on.

 

[Neopolymath]

So I guess you missed the part where an oncology doctor said some people might not like to hear themselves referred to as "the leukemic in bed 4."

I know others who don't want to be called an arthritic. They may talk about having arthritic hands but that doesn't mean they want to be labeled an "arthritic." Also doesn't mean they're in denial and unable to accept their limitations.

Same with being called a "paraplegic."

I'm making a comment that as a society we have created a situation where admitting we have health problems is a weakness or a flaw not just part of being human (and an inevitability). Being called a diabetic highlights that and it's uncomfortable because of a larger systemic issue with culture IMO.

But, it also means that someone has to own their illness so to speak. If I ignore that I'm diabetic then I can pretend I don't have to face the life changes resulting from that fact.

 

[Mass Effect]

I'm making a comment that as a society we have created a situation where admitting we have health problems is a weakness or a flaw not just part of being human (and an inevitability). Being called a diabetic highlights that and it's uncomfortable because of a larger systemic issue with culture IMO.

But, it also means that someone has to own their illness so to speak. If I ignore that I'm diabetic then I can pretend I don't have to face the life changes resulting from that fact.

Saying you don't want to be referred to as "the diabetic" is not the same as ignoring that you have diabetes. You can very much embrace that you have diabetes and/or are in poor health while still objecting to be called "the diabetic" as if your personhood is reduced only to your disease.

 

[Neopolymath]

Saying you don't want to be referred to as "the diabetic" is not the same as ignoring that you have diabetes. You can very much embrace that you have diabetes and/or are in poor health while still objecting to be called "the diabetic" as if your personhood is reduced only to your disease.

That's awesome, man. We agree. It's nuanced.

 

[doomer_md]

Let's say the reason is totally irrational. Would you, as a doctor, then continue to call patients "diabetic," not caring if it upsets patients (and therefore likely negatively impacts care) since they're irrational? Or would you make the slight shift in language in order to better outcomes since it costs you only one extra syllable?

Sure. Then a referral to psych.

 

[Goro]

I can't even believe this is even a discussion. I just can't.

It's SDN, y'know.

 

[Lawpy]

It's SDN, y'know.

I'm currently confused what we're talking about now

 

[Crayola227]

Sure. Then a referral to psych.

You realize what an awful and wasteful response this is, because your patient doesn't want you to use their disease process as a stand in noun for them?

That you would not just adjust your language in response to such "irrationality" is very irrational. And sadly, you don't refer to psych just because someone is being irrational. Poor doctoring.

 

[doomer_md]

You realize what an awful and wasteful response this is, because your patient doesn't want you to use their disease process as a stand in noun for them?

That you would not just adjust your language in response to such "irrationality" is very irrational. And sadly, you don't refer to psych just because someone is being irrational. Poor doctoring.

Lol I was being sarcastic. Mostly at least, because I don’t like entertaining people’s delusions. That makes me crazy? Sure. I’m not going to get into a grammar argument but calling someone “diabetic” is an adjective, calling someone “a diabetic” is a noun. So no, it’s not a noun.

 

[Mass Effect]

You realize what an awful and wasteful response this is, because your patient doesn't want you to use their disease process as a stand in noun for them?

That you would not just adjust your language in response to such "irrationality" is very irrational. And sadly, you don't refer to psych just because someone is being irrational. Poor doctoring.

It's ok. When I get the calls from these jokesters, I let them know what's up.

 

[DrStupidIdiot]

With all the problems happening in medicine right now, I think it is both ridiculous and disgusting that this is what the AMA decides to focus on and spend our membership dues on. F*** the AMA.

 

[sylvanthus]

With all the problems happening in medicine right now, I think it is both ridiculous and disgusting that this is what the AMA decides to focus on and spend our membership dues on. F*** the AMA.

I am not surprised. Dropped my AMA membership awhile ago. Medicine is in a free fall and this is the focus?

 

[ron_johnson]

Blacklist/blackmail are not racial in origin; any focus on stuff like this is just an attempt to profit from conflict and a distraction from the de-facto societal/geographic segregation that really exists.

 

[IlDestriero]

I have black listed the AMA, so I’m not concerned.
They’re really only relevant during election season where they pretend to represent physicians and overstate their importance anyway.

 

[AnonymousDoctorGuyPerson]

The fact some of these comments are coming from future & current physicians *shudder*

 

[Ganon]

I just wanna wave to all the nurses who are going to be screenshotting this thread and using it as evidence to support their continued consumption of medical practice.

Hi fam!

 

[Lawpy]

I just wanna wave to all the nurses who are going to be screenshotting this thread and using it as evidence to support their continued consumption of medical practice.

Hi fam!

No need. The AMA is already working on their behalf

 

[FutureInternist]

The fact some of these comments are coming from future & current physicians *shudder*

Burnett’s law…. Ding ding ding
And we already got Godwin’s law earlier.

 

[TehTeddy]

The fact some of these comments are coming from future & current physicians *shudder*

Tell me about it

 

[sloop]

Whoever said that IF the AMA started censuring based on this, would be a line in the sand, I think is fair.

I think I initially missed this comment or neglected to reply to it.

What you described is almost exactly what I said:

To me, there are two things that are simultaneously true. On the one hand, I do think that we should stop using language that identifies people with their diseases. That’s clearly going to make people feel ****ty, and it’s not really helpful. At the same time, it’s always concerning to me when groups make it a focus to regulate language. That is very uncomfortable and reminiscent of some historically horrible, totalitarian regimes.

I think it’s fine to suggest that people use certain terms in professional contexts, but if the AMA started sanctioning members or something based on their non adherence to these recommendations, I would strongly object to that.

 

[Billiam95]

Doctors Warn New Medical School Guidance Would Lead to Unqualified Physicians and Unscientific Medicine

The two accrediting bodies for American medical schools say that meritocracy is "malignant" and that race has "no genetic or scientific basis," positions that many doctors worry will lower standards of care and endanger lives by discouraging vital genetic testing.

freebeacon.com

Those concepts include the ideas that "individualism and meritocracy" are "malignant narratives" that "create harm," that using race as a proxy for genetics "leads directly to racial health inequities," and that medical vulnerability is the "result of socially created processes" rather than biology.

Integrating these ideas into medicine, five professors and practicing doctors told the Washington Free Beacon, would be a catastrophe, resulting in underqualified doctors, missed diagnoses, and unscientific medical school curricula.

The guidance won't just influence the way doctors talk, these practitioners said, but also what they know and how they treat patients. It could even make them unwilling to screen racial minorities for serious conditions—including many types of cancer—that they are more likely to inherit, on the mistaken belief that genes play no role in racial health disparities.

 

[Lawpy]

Doctors Warn New Medical School Guidance Would Lead to Unqualified Physicians and Unscientific Medicine

The two accrediting bodies for American medical schools say that meritocracy is "malignant" and that race has "no genetic or scientific basis," positions that many doctors worry will lower standards of care and endanger lives by discouraging vital genetic testing.

freebeacon.com

Why is the AMA spreading disinformation and propaganda? Why is the AMA hellbent in destroying the medical profession?

Why can't we dissolve the AMA and let actual sensible organizations like PPP be the de facto organization for physicians, residents and students?

 

[Lawpy]

I'll go further. Regardless of personal views on this topic, everyone should end their AMA membership immediately because it's clear as day the AMA is a terrible, narcissistic organization that actively benefits from polarizing and destroying the medical profession. Midlevels and nurses are protected by powerful lobbying groups and unions. Why can't we do the same?

PPP is the critical organization to join and support

 

[nimbus]

Yes, about 4 people have said that in this thread. I have literally never heard anyone say yellow for Asians except an Asian doctor lol. But clearly it has been and probably continues to be used plenty.

One of my college buddies wrote this book. It’s a dense read.


Amazon product