Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All I am reading in these responses are distortions of what some people believe or hope DEI to be, combined with a failure to confront the actual practice of awarding NIH grants on the basis of the research scientist’s skin color.

You have literally zero idea what you’re talking about. Zero.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, I don't get it.

Can we study menopause? That only affects women. So is that DEI? Can we study women's recovery from birth? Can we study postpartum depression?

Can we study the fact that physicians underestimate pain perception in Black patients? Or do we have to just ignore that?

Can we train people that depression symptoms often show up as physical complaints in East Asian populations? Or do we have to not tell our trainees that?

Even if the left, or even NIH, went to far with DEI, the idea that we can't study/train these things AT ALL is outrageous. If you're a conservative, you have to know that this is a really stupid overcorrection.

This new policy is awful and outrageous. It's a snowflake level overcorrection and will hurt women - especially women's health research - as well as minorities. Also, students and professors should be free to research what they want and if it's a compelling topic (that includes the word gender or mentions a minority group) it should be able to compete for funding.

I hate what Trump has been doing and continues to do to our country. I didn't vote for him and am proud of that. I hope others who may have been swayed by him have now looked at what he's doing to our economy and votes him out.

Wait - you truly believe scientific grants should be awarded on the basis of skin color?

Seriously??

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:New articles state NIH will not participate in grants with any university that has DEI programming or diverse from Israel…

The DEI portion seems like it would impact many highly respected research universities

The Trump administration is simply applying the law and fighting racial discrimination, specifically: requiring compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits race-based discrimination in federally funded programs.

Aren’t you opposed to race-based discrimination, OP?

Anonymous wrote:All I am reading in these responses are distortions of what some people believe or hope DEI to be, combined with a failure to confront the actual practice of awarding NIH grants on the basis of the research scientist’s skin color.

Anonymous wrote:All I am reading in these responses are distortions of what some people believe or hope DEI to be, combined with a failure to confront the actual practice of awarding NIH grants on the basis of the research scientist’s skin color.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, I don't get it.

Can we study menopause? That only affects women. So is that DEI? Can we study women's recovery from birth? Can we study postpartum depression?

Can we study the fact that physicians underestimate pain perception in Black patients? Or do we have to just ignore that?

Can we train people that depression symptoms often show up as physical complaints in East Asian populations? Or do we have to not tell our trainees that?

Even if the left, or even NIH, went to far with DEI, the idea that we can't study/train these things AT ALL is outrageous. If you're a conservative, you have to know that this is a really stupid overcorrection.

This new policy is awful and outrageous. It's a snowflake level overcorrection and will hurt women - especially women's health research - as well as minorities. Also, students and professors should be free to research what they want and if it's a compelling topic (that includes the word gender or mentions a minority group) it should be able to compete for funding.

I hate what Trump has been doing and continues to do to our country. I didn't vote for him and am proud of that. I hope others who may have been swayed by him have now looked at what he's doing to our economy and votes him out.

Wait - you truly believe scientific grants should be awarded on the basis of skin color?

Seriously??

Anonymous wrote:DEI requires judging people on the color of their skin instead of the content of their grant application.

That, is racism.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, I don't get it.

Can we study menopause? That only affects women. So is that DEI? Can we study women's recovery from birth? Can we study postpartum depression?

Can we study the fact that physicians underestimate pain perception in Black patients? Or do we have to just ignore that?

Can we train people that depression symptoms often show up as physical complaints in East Asian populations? Or do we have to not tell our trainees that?

Even if the left, or even NIH, went to far with DEI, the idea that we can't study/train these things AT ALL is outrageous. If you're a conservative, you have to know that this is a really stupid overcorrection.

This new policy is awful and outrageous. It's a snowflake level overcorrection and will hurt women - especially women's health research - as well as minorities. Also, students and professors should be free to research what they want and if it's a compelling topic (that includes the word gender or mentions a minority group) it should be able to compete for funding.

I hate what Trump has been doing and continues to do to our country. I didn't vote for him and am proud of that. I hope others who may have been swayed by him have now looked at what he's doing to our economy and votes him out.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Gotcha. We want women to have more babies, but it’s now illegal to research fertility, pregnancy outcomes, post partum issues, etc, etc. because DEI. Makes perfect sense.

I too want a definition of DEI. It’s like “woke”— it means everything you disagree with and nothing substantive.

Yup, DEI as I have seen it wasn't about having unqualified women and brown people and poor people succeed in life. It was about making sure that qualified women and brown and poor people could succeed in life without discrimination or undue barriers. Hard to do if you can't talk about scientifically evident differences in health.

Men, as well as many of the other genders, can give birth to babies too, you know. That is a scientific fact.

Science is real, PP.

Oh the trans bogeyman that is hurting your life in so many ways. Keep talking about that when your female loved one has ovarian cancer, and the NIH grants studying women have been canceled because..DEI.

Let me ask you this, PP:

How is getting rid of DEI affecting you personally?

Seriously: why do you care?

Because it hurts me to see this administration wreaking havoc on our nation's public health, foreign policy and competitive edge in the name of DEI.
Because I care about women and people of color and know that there is a long history of people getting denied opportunities they because of discrimination.
Because I know that women have different health issues from men and that different ethnicities are more affected by certain diseases.

+1 This. I don't know how to tell someone that they should care about other people and their health. That's on your own lack of values...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Gotcha. We want women to have more babies, but it’s now illegal to research fertility, pregnancy outcomes, post partum issues, etc, etc. because DEI. Makes perfect sense.

I too want a definition of DEI. It’s like “woke”— it means everything you disagree with and nothing substantive.

Yup, DEI as I have seen it wasn't about having unqualified women and brown people and poor people succeed in life. It was about making sure that qualified women and brown and poor people could succeed in life without discrimination or undue barriers. Hard to do if you can't talk about scientifically evident differences in health.

Men, as well as many of the other genders, can give birth to babies too, you know. That is a scientific fact.

Science is real, PP.

Anonymous wrote:DEI requires judging people on the color of their skin instead of the content of their grant application.

That, is racism.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Gotcha. We want women to have more babies, but it’s now illegal to research fertility, pregnancy outcomes, post partum issues, etc, etc. because DEI. Makes perfect sense.

I too want a definition of DEI. It’s like “woke”— it means everything you disagree with and nothing substantive.

Yup, DEI as I have seen it wasn't about having unqualified women and brown people and poor people succeed in life. It was about making sure that qualified women and brown and poor people could succeed in life without discrimination or undue barriers. Hard to do if you can't talk about scientifically evident differences in health.

Men, as well as many of the other genders, can give birth to babies too, you know. That is a scientific fact.

Science is real, PP.

Oh the trans bogeyman that is hurting your life in so many ways. Keep talking about that when your female loved one has ovarian cancer, and the NIH grants studying women have been canceled because..DEI.

Let me ask you this, PP:

How is getting rid of DEI affecting you personally?

Seriously: why do you care?

Because it hurts me to see this administration wreaking havoc on our nation's public health, foreign policy and competitive edge in the name of DEI.
Because I care about women and people of color and know that there is a long history of people getting denied opportunities they because of discrimination.
Because I know that women have different health issues from men and that different ethnicities are more affected by certain diseases.