Literally just got denied medical service for being white.

My response was to the following comment.

So wasn't weighing in really on the thread topic specifically, but rather at comment quoted here.

As far as the thread topic goes, I think it's a little silly automatically lumping minorities into high risk categories. You're not high risk because of the color of your skin when it comes to COVID, it's not something like Sickle Cell. More likely, the people making these choices are making assumptions about minorities that assumes they're going to be in high risk categories. My guess as to what it is? Obesity, since that's pretty much a universal qualifier for "high-risk" no matter who you are.

It may also be a response to the lower vaccination rates among those minorities meaning they aren't actually high-risk medically speaking, but they want to clear away any hurdles they can to get the vaccination rates up in those minority communities. Allowing them to "sidestep" the line is one way of doing that. But that doesn't address the underlying cause of why vaccination rates are lower for those minorities, which is the real problem.

 

Equality means everyone has the same access to opportunity - no advantage or quarter given to special in groups. That's the last thing they want.

 

Exactly, and exactly!

 

Bingo! They don’t see it like that, instead they’re doing everything possible to deflect.

 

There's no elephant in the room if they can't see it.

 

Discrimination.

 

That's absolute nonsense. Anybody, regardless of insurance status, can walk in to any pharmacy, hospital, urgent care, even pop up sites and get the vaccination. No questions asked, not a cent due.

 

Sure, tat is a vital question that does need to be asked. I'm not sure such generic criteria is a good thing in this kind of context but I don't have all of the relevant information behind the decision so that should lead to questions, not unconditional and selective condemnation. You apparently don't want to know why though, because you didn't ask or seek the answer to those questions, you just dismissed that one element of the criteria out of hand.

Conditions like obesity and diabetes aren't choices though. They can be caused by some personal choices but that is not always the case and generally not the only factor.

You also seem to be ignoring the fact that things like obesity and chronic diseases (including diabetes) are individual listed as criteria here too, yet you're not attacking those as "rewarding choices". You focused entirely on race.

So again, is the criteria of being aged 65 or over automatically ageist too? Discrimination is literally treating people differently on the basis of an identified characteristic but that isn't necessarily wrong. We legitimately discriminate on valid grounds all the time. To label something as inappropriate discrimination, you need to specifically identify that, such as with the question you opened with (but didn't answer) of why black and Latino patients have been identified as being at greater risk in the first place.

 

None of this is new actually. When I was 24 I tried to apply for a type of health insurance that was available in my state through welfare. I was literally told straight out that since I was a white male age 24 I was denied. That if I had been a black woman same age then I would have gotten it. Of course I thought that it was BS but beyond that didn't give much thought into it. Now, knowing what I do about the law I probably would have sued.

 

1) I'm the one asking WHY, remember. The WHY is crucial for knowing whether you're going to be engaging in discrimination or not. Which is the reason I posted to that effect - with the question of WHY. I'm the one saying the answers to those questions are super important. IOW, you could not possibly have got this more wrong.

2) Of course they are choices. That's why prisoners of war are always thin. There are a couple of extremely rare conditions which make people 'swell', but 99.99% of obese people got there by eating. Type 2 diabetes is also a choice. It takes consistent poor health of a long period of time to trigger any predisposition, and the sorts of behaviours which contribute to developing metabolic malfunction are known by all. Eat too much and/or don't exercise, and you're endocrine function will malfunction.

3) Because those conditions (as nominated risk factors for COVID) are not predicated on race .. they're predicated on the co-morbidity itself. Obviously.

4) Being over 65 is a risk factor for all, regardless of race. Race itself is NOT a risk factor, in any way. There is no difference in how COVID behaves from one race to the next. Any differences are INDIVIDUAL, not racial. They are a result of individual health status at the time of infection. There is no 'unifying' imutable state other than age, which predisposes an infected person to severe illness or death from COVID.

 

And of course, being unable to afford health insurance means they will want to take extra good care of their health. Given they can't easily access medical treatment, they'll naturally want to avoid anything like obesity, diabetes, heart disease, etc.

Let's face it, only rich folk can afford to have poor health!

 

Except they won't know about it.

 

They won't know how to avoid obesity etc? Are you suggesting that poor folk are stupider than small children?

 

Diabetes, heart problems, high blood pressure.

 

Come off it, Dude. Every child over 8 knows how to avoid that stuff .. it's taught in basic anatomy/health in every school.

And again, what an incredibly insulting thing to suggest - that because people are less wealthy they must be stupider than children.

 

Sorry but without medical testing you won't know you have a problem.

 

That's after the fact.

The goal is to AVOID those conditions in the first place, by remaining in peak health and fitness. After all, why would a person who can't afford it, allow themselves to become so unhealthy that they need more healthcare than a healthy person? It's incredibly irresponsible and foolish.

 

@Steve N I’m sorry this happened to you but what’s funny here is that this can just as easily happen to a white liberal
These fools are voting for their own extinction!
I think you should go to Fox News with this, get some lawsuit money while it’s still legal to “sue while white” and enjoy the cash

 

A lot of times you can't.

 

This didn’t happen to me, the thread title was taken from the Twitter link. But it did happen to someone.

 

Bullsh!t. There's nothing easier and cheaper than eating a lean, healthy diet (rice, beans & veg), and staying on your feet more hours than you're on your ass. And don't bother claiming that some people can't exercise - again, a child knows that if you don't exercise, you must adjust your food intake accordingly.

A poor person allowing themselves to become fat, is like taking out a loan they have no hope of repaying. As self-indulgent and impulsive as a toddler. Definitely not the behaviour of a responsible adult, and not the behaviour of someone who accepts the reality of their poverty. IOW it's the behaviour of a delusional three year old.

 

And yet sometimes it can't be done.

 

Nope. Sometimes people don't WANT to do it.

They can say 'can't' all they like, but 100% strike-rate of skinny POWs says they're lying. You yourself know they're lying .. because you're not stupid. That tells me you're either poor and fat yourself, or are close to someone who is poor and fat.

 

I know biology.

 

If you think biology proves obesity is unavoidable, then you went to the world's most inept school.

Try medical science, if you want to know what's really going on. Or better yet take a thousand fat people, lock them up, and put them all on prisoner of war rations. At the end of six months not one will still be fat.