Well, once could associate him with a panda.
Posted on 06/19/2008 6:07:50 PM PDT by the Real fifi
James Taranto calls out Michelle Obama for appalling pandering to the lie that the government deliberately injected black men with syphilis in the notorious Tuskegee Study. Yesterday, a New York Times article about her noted that she had killed a research project on the human papillomavirus, because of sensitivity to the widespread mistaken belief in the black community that that such research abuses happen to blacks.
"The Times's account suggests that girls in Chicago were denied potentially lifesaving vaccinations because Michelle Obama pandered to racial paranoia instead of standing up for the truth. Is that why they pay her the big bucks?"
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Well, once could associate him with a panda.
If this is true doesn't it open the door for a civil lawsuit against obama from the girls family's?
Sometimes leaders have to twist in the wind for what is right........Harry Truman.......Obie and he wifey view it as a popularity contest.
“because of sensitivity to the widespread mistaken belief in the black community that that such research abuses happen to blacks.”
She killed a medical research program because of a mistaken belief? Isn’t this carrying political correctness a little too far? Wouldn’t it be more beneficial to society if she tried to correct the mistaken belief?
The black men were not injected with syphilis, but they were diagnosed with syphilis and left untreated even after there was a simple cure found for this disease. They were unwilling and unknowing participants in a study and the medical establishment at the time treated them without regard to medical ethics. The ignored the most important tenant of medicine to “first do no harm”. Please do some research about this subject.
I know there are a few black folk who still don’t have alot of trust in doctors due to this incident. I will not be letting my teen daughter get Guardisil if that is what they are talking about, there is not enough research on the long term effects and it does not prevent all strains of the human papilloma virus (which of course causes genital warts and cervical cancer). I don’t know enough about the story to really comment. Perhaps she was thinking of this.
The author said all these things—and that since that time there was a substantial change in biomedical ethics which would have forbidden such treatment ..including at the University of Chicago.
The point is she prevented parents from even having that choice. The virus it protects against is a killer—only one exposure will do it. No vaccine is perfect or without adverse consequences to some who use it..like all of life it’s a risk/reward thing. In this case, Michelle made it impossible for the parents to make that choice.
Even if they were in the tertiary stage, which I’m not sure of either, why not advised them that they had the disease, and not to have sex with anyone. This study was wrong in every way.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.