Is it unreasonable for a bunch of white people to debate rationale for higher proportion of BAME people dying from Covid-19?

[TGear]

I am part of a professional group on Facebook. A member has asked why people from BAME communities have a higher number of covid-19 related deaths. It's now just a bunch of white people trying to work this out. Is this totally inappropriate? I want to be sensitive to other people and acknowledge that it's not something I can relate to on a personal level, but equally I feel everyone should be asking the answer to this to support those that are disproportionately affected.

My first assumptions for the disparity would be that the disease is more likely to kill poor people.

The reason being is that they tend to live in more densely populated areas, are more afraid to access help from authorities for various (and often legitimate) reasons so will wait until it’s too late to go to hospital (or won’t be taken seriously until it’s too late), are less likely to have jobs where they can work from home and don’t have private vehicles so are still squeezed onto public transport, have less of a stake in society so don’t access the news so may not see key messages, have so many issues to deal with that they didn’t see Covid-19 as a real threat compared to everything else until the virus had quietly worked its way through their whole family, live in multi-generational households or close to other relatives, more likely to be overweight which increases risk of diabetes and heart problems, more likely to smoke etc etc

BAME people are over-represented when it comes to poverty so they will be hit harder. Plus some BAME have culturally closer ties with family so are likely to be all piled into church, mosque, aunties for dinner etc, places were there is continuous close contact, the perfect places for the virus to work it’s way around where people get repeated heavy exposure.

sorry forgot to attache image!

I really do not see where you get that the OP wants to stop discussion

Read the thread title again ...

She’s asking ‘is it unreasonable ... for white people ... to debate’

I doubt any important research was being conducted on facebook, no matter how 'professional' the members. I don't think OP has hindered scientific progress!

Maybe is due to a marker on a particular genome.

Surely the most important thing is for the reason(s) to be discovered and not the colour of the skin of the people attempting to work it out?

When my sister was in hospital - the bed opposite her had a woman in. They couldnt find out what was wrong with her. She had this terrible pain centred on her throat. After 3 days it was found it was a heart attack. The medical descriptions are very focussed on how a man experiences a heart attack. Apparently this throat thing is very typically female. All those doctors including female struggled to escape the bias of their training /medical books. So absolutley people should be looking at data, discussing using their brains. If you are modelling DNA its not an issue. But an awareness of limitations is needed to get a fuller picture too.

There's an interesting debate about female healthcare workers at the moment - who seem to be at increased chance of dying from Covid-19

The discussion is around PPE equipment being designed for the average male body - so it's ill fitting for women.

It's a tricky one as lived experience of BAME NHS workers is potentially as if not more relevant to this as "science" is.

Eg BAME staff less likely to speak up or complain about no PPE or unsafe working conditions, also known as systemic racism...

So BAME staff absolutely need to be part of the wider conversation to understand what might be at play, it's not just scientists looking at genetics or even socioeconomic background. Perhaps that's what the OP was getting at?

Read the thread title again ...

I am reading the title again (and the OP) and I still do not see it, sorry.

I see someone questioning whether her and her peers ethnic background might influence the discussion.

But an awareness of limitations is needed to get a fuller picture too.

This

'Professional' and 'Facebook' are not words that go together are they?

I don't understand what you're getting at OP, or why you'd ask the question in the first place (I'm pinky-pale-white, if that helps you to decide if my reply is valid).

Are you looking to cause upset ?

Eg BAME staff less likely to speak up or complain about no PPE or unsafe working conditions, also known as systemic racism

Probably also ties into nurses and HCA staff being less likely to speak about PPE etc - systemic sexism

Etc

Lots of factors that go beyond science

Your ethnicity and the colour of your skin is totally irrelevant in asking this question.
There is research underway looking at DNA of Covid victims to see if there are any influences affecting susceptibility

But the point is that if a wider range of people were involved at the top level of relevant research bodies we wouldn't have waited until now to start discussing factors affecting susceptibility.

And the way people reach the decision making level of UK organisations is via exactly the type of 'informal' interaction the OP is highlighting.

So BAME staff absolutely need to be part of the wider conversation to understand what might be at play,

Maybe so. But it doesn't mean the conversation isn't allowed to take place because there are no bame participants at that moment in time.

FFS

And the way people reach the decision making level of UK organisations is via exactly the type of 'informal' interaction the OP is highlighting.

I think you’re seriously over estimating the power and influence of FB groups.

'Professional' and 'Facebook' are not words that go together are they?
They can do. I'm in some teaching groups where teachers share resources and discuss developments in education. They are lots of professional interest groups where people discuss relevant topics.

The mistake the OP has made is confusing a group of people in the same profession discussing a current situation and a body of people tasked with officially forming a professional group to investigate a particular topic in a way that stands up to public scrutiny.

Thinking the former is unreasonable based on the skin colour of those discussing the topic is looking for issues. For example, should those on Facebook refrain from commenting on a post when they're online until such a time when the ethnic make up of the Facebook thread is appropriately comrpsied of the correct representative percentages? What if (and this is likely to be a bigger issue) the profession is dominated by one group over others so there's never going to be the correct % representation in informal discussion until the make up of the profession changes over time? Should nobody discuss issues relevant to their profession unless invited to be part of suitably vetted and representative bodies?

Same idea - if there were wider representation in Government and in Cabinet, then it wouldn't have taken so long for issues over the self employed, renters, charities, care homes etc to be talked about at Cabinet and measures put in place.

The mistake the OP has made is confusing a group of people in the same profession discussing a current situation and a body of people tasked with officially forming a professional group to investigate a particular topic in a way that stands up to public scrutiny.

This

I think you’re seriously over estimating the power and influence of FB groups.

I think you're seriously underestimating my personal and professional knowledge of what I'm talking about. (Easily done on an anonymous forum obvs!)

Especially right now the academic groups I'm attached to have all migrated to screen-based conversation. They are not diminished in any way.

I think you're seriously underestimating my personal and professional knowledge of what I'm talking about. (Easily done on an anonymous forum obvs!)

But we know nothing about this group. It could have five just qualified HCP in it for all we know.

• or it could have thirty senior professionals based around the country, who effectively share out the top jobs amongst themselves and their protégés. (Via early notification of vacancies, influential references, favours called in ...)

"it's not something I can relate to on a personal level" you're saying you only care when white people die?

We don’t know, is the point.