Are you salty?

No I don't mean are you mad, I meant do you have a lot of salt in your body. Last week CNN's Black in America allowed Roland Fryer to open up the "salt sensitivity theory" of Black health again (see 31 minutes in on the first video below). If you followed my previous link to Blacksmythe's blog on Black in America you probably got a sense of why folks are so cynical of this theory and Fryer's fame for unsubstantiated or non-peer reviewed theories, but the responses below really speak to the power of popular perception.
(If you have two hours (that you'll never get back), here is Pt 1 of Black in America - The Black Woman & Family ... don't get me started on how Black women didn't get a full program)




First a press release from Dr. Thomas LaViest at John Hopkins.

MEDIA RELEASE
July 28, 2008

Johns Hopkins Health Disparities Expert Criticizes CNN Report

Baltimore – Promoting unproven theories as a key cause of the
enormous health gap between African Americans and other ethnic
groups will likely widen the gap further, said a leading researcher
working to close the gap.

Thomas A. LaVeist, PhD, Director of the Center for Health Disparities
Solutions at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health was
alarmed when he saw the health care segment of CNN's "Black In
America" series and heard the salt-sensitivity theory being promoted
as a key reason to explain why blacks are unhealthy compared to
whites and other groups.

"I commend CNN and Soledad O'Brien for tackling this very important
topic, but to expose an audience to this theory is very troubling and
disappointing," LaVeist said.

During the segment, O'Brien interviewed Harvard economist Roland
Fryer who said he believes the salt-sensitive theory may be key to
unlocking why blacks on average have poor health. The salt-
sensitivity theory claims that during the transatlantic slave trade,
African slaves whose bodies held higher levels of salt were better
able to survive the long brutal voyage to the Americas. Their
descendants are now genetically disposed to hypertension and other
diseases that are tied to salt.

"This bogus theory just won't seem to die," LaVeist said. "Even
though public health researchers have discredited the theory it
continues to be promoted by people who are not knowledgeable about
the field. THE AVERAGE HEALTH CONSUMER WATCHING CNN COULD TAKE THIS
AS THE GOSPEL AND RUN WITH IT TO THEIR OWN DETRIMENT."

Most research scientists who work on this public health problem would
agree that some of the key health disparity causes are:

• Blacks are exposed to more environmental toxins because of
residential segregation
• Blacks have less access to quality healthcare
• Higher levels of poverty among African Americans
• Higher levels of use of harmful products such as cigarettes
• Less healthy diets
• Less healthy foods in African American communities
• Residing in more stressful environments

"To suggest that health disparities are caused by a gene that exists
in African Americans and does not exist in others is ridiculous.
There are no genes found in only one race group," LaVeist
said. "Hypertension and all other major causes of death are caused by
a complex set of factors. They are not single gene diseases. If race
disparities were primarily caused by a gene, that gene would have to
cause hypertension and cancer and diabetes and glaucoma, and Crohn's
disease and asthma and HIV-AIDS and every other condition that is
more prevalent in blacks and we know no one gene does that."

"I respect professor Fryer, but quoting an economist as an expert on
health disparities is like interviewing me for a story about why gas
prices have spiked," LaVeist said. "Not only are researchers at
Hopkins working on this problem, but people are working on this issue
right there in Atlanta where CNN is headquartered. The problem of
health disparities is complex. By trying to reduce it to a simplistic
explanation we risk having health care providers, policymakers and
patients feel there is nothing they can do to address the issue."

About Thomas LaVeist:
As the William C. and Nancy F. Richardson Professor in Health Policy,
and Director of the Hopkins Center for Health Disparities Solutions
at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. LaVeist has
studied the major healthcare gaps in America, the trends causing them
and the problems they create. His work is enabling healthcare
organizations and individuals to prepare for a new America—a minority
majority.

Second, an editorial by Osagie Obasogie penned a little over a year ago in response to Oprah's show advancing the same bogus salty theory.

Both commentaries I received via the Spirit of 1848 listserv, thanks for sharing Shak-G.

I wish I had more hands...

so I could give CNN Black in America four thumbs down!!!

Really too disgusted to comment on it, but if you want a decent flavor of what was running through my mind, check out BlackSmythe's live blog post on it!

Been around the world and I, I, I...

So I was traveling this past week and didn't get a chance to hit you with anything new. But now I'm back in the States and I wanted to quickly to tell you to check out the Addicted to Race podcast that I guest co-hosted with Carmen Van Kerchove. In continuing with the theme of world travel, the podcast features a variety of subjects from media coverage of Mynamar, the MLK monument in DC, to Hip-Hop and accountability. As always, I had a great time cutting it up with Carmen, one of the sharpest cats out there on Race and Pop culture!

And on a side, but related note to my traveling, I'll be taking some time to reorganize my stuff over the next while, so posts may be slow.

It's not a game: race, sports, and justice

A very peculiar thing happened last week, Willie Randolph went from bad manager, to bad guy in the eyes of the media. During the past couple of weeks, the Mets have continued to fall in the National League East, a division they were favored to win. Willie Randolph is cool, sometimes too cool, he sticks behind his players, he doesn't throw water coolers, he gives you glimpses of his immense frustration with grown men who can't seem to throw, catch or hit a small ball. But Randolph became the center of a media storm recently when he interviewed with the Bergen Record (yeah, I never heard of it either) and he commented on the way the Mets network SNY portrayed him. He felt that the network was portraying him unfairly and in many ways attempting to vilify him. The article says,

"Is it racial?" Randolph asked. "Huh? It smells a little bit."

Asked directly if he believes black managers are held to different standards than their white counterparts, Randolph said: "I don't know how to put my finger on it, but I think there's something there. Herman Edwards did pretty well here and he won a couple of playoff [games], and they were pretty hard on Herm. Isiah [Thomas] didn't do a great job, but they beat up Isiah pretty good. ... I don't know if people are used to a certain figurehead. There's something weird about it.

"I think it's very important ... that I handle myself in a way that the [African-American managers] coming behind me will get the opportunities, too ... ."

Those words, set off a firestorm in NY. No longer was the issue was Willie a poor manager, but it was Willie is playing the race card? (I'm glad that Matt Cerone had the courage to "question" the notion of the race card) Like most Black folks who realize their job hangs on a string, Randolph quickly apologized for his statement.Here I excerpt from the NYTimes' coverage.

“I want to apologize to Met ownership and SNY and my team for the unnecessary distraction that I created, and I caused, the last couple days,” Randolph said. “I shouldn’t have said what I said. It was a mistake; there are no excuses for that.

“The fact of life is we have not been playing well as a team. When that happens you are going to get criticized for that. I take full responsibility for what I said out of frustration. I wanted to publicly apologize.”

He continued on

“I never said anything about anybody being a racist,” Randolph said. “What I said was kind of like what it felt like to me.”

Asked why he issued an apology, Randolph said, “I just felt like it was something I needed to do.” When asked if we was told to apologize, he said, “No."

Randolph said he tried to contact the Mets’ owners Wednesday, but did not reach them.

This morning I visited Metsblog to see why my team keeps sliding further in the hole but I was quickly greeted with a post on Randolph's meeting with the Mets front office. Now with a team that is below .500 you expect this meeting to be about "changes" on the field, they suggest the meeting is first about Randolph's comments to the media.

We live in a society where the smallest mention of the role of race, can set off a firestorm. The idea that we live in a perfectly equal society should be laughable. A few years ago Gary Sheffield resurfaced the issue race and baseball, only to be met with heavy resistance. Willie knew that if he was going to actually keep his job, he would have to squelch a legitimate dialogue. While some folks argue the race card is the way that people weaken race relations, in reality, we all too seldom acknowledge the vulnerability that people of color face to discrimination. Saying something happened to you because of your race is sometimes more of a hazard to your well being than the original race-related offense. The culture of fear that Americans live in regarding racism has lead folks to truncate or all together eliminate dialogue about the consequences and meaning of race and racism (yes, they are different).

I'll close with a recent anecdote from a close friend who is a successful African-American male. A week or so ago, my friend walked into a late night convenience store to get a snack. As he thumbed the snacks, he reached into his suit pocket and pulled out his wallet, as he realized they didn't have his snacks, he put his wallet back into his pocket. As he began to walk out of the store an entering White customer in cut offs and a tee shirt said to him, "You gonna pay for that?" To which he looked back in bewilderment. My friend, with constitution said, "Excuse me, who are you?" To which the man responded, "A friend of the owner. Are you gonna pay for that or just take it?" At that moment my friend had a crossroads. He could either reach into his suit's pocket and retrieve his wallet to demonstrate he had not taken any snacks or could ignore the man accusing him of theft.

Before completing the story, my friend asked me, "What would you have done?" I thought and offered a measured response, "I don't think there is a 'winning answer.' It's like the tipping dilemma. You go to a restaurant, a waiter or waitress treats you poorly because they think Black people don't tip well. You in turn can either tip well for poor service and try challenge the stereotype or tip poorly given the service." As we sat on the phone discussing options, I was reminded that no matter how much education (we both have PhDs), income (we have successfully broken into the middle class), or accolades we gather, we remain vulnerable to racism and sometimes paralyzed by it. No degree, clothing, or social analysis can fully protect us from the pollution of racism. People argue that racial bigotry is wrong, but have we reached the point where calling out the bigotry is even worse in public opinion than the bigotry?

Awaiting the "Gender" speech... keep waiting.

Jewel Woods offers a really good commentary on the difficulty of a national gender dialogue.

Many commentators within the black community argued that it was “inevitable” that Senator Obama would have to give a speech on “race”. Not only in light of the comments by Rev. Wright, but also because of pressure within the black community by opinion-framers like Tavis Smiley to have him address issues like Katrina, unemployment, education, incarceration, and other issues that have disproportionately impacted Black America in the past, and continue to impact Black America in the present.

However, was it ever “inevitable” that Senator Clinton would have to give a speech on gender? And is it inevitable now that Senator Clinton will respond to the comments of her surrogates or the demands within the women's/feminist movement that insist she talk about issues of gender the way that constituents within the black community have consistently called for Senator Obama to address issues of race?

Woods, who recently authored Don't Blame Rio, is the founder and Executive Director of the Renaissance Male Project is an emergent voice on masculinty, gender, and race. Catch his star as it rises.

For your understanding of Black Liberation Theology

In the case that you haven't had a clear discussion of Black Liberation Theology, check out this Times article (hat tip to JCP)and if you're uptown or actually near a computer. The Schomburg is going to have a great event on May 12th from 6:30-9:30 entitled "Understanding Black Liberation Theology: A 40 Year Retrospective". The event will feature various experts and be simulcast.

This is the diagram that sits at the entrance to the Schomburg. One of my favorites! Unfortunately they don't have a picture available for purchase at the store, only a very expensive original print. Maybe one day they'll make it available!

1 picture = how many words?

They say a picture is worth a thousand words. One of the most striking images I've ever encountered and occasionally have on my desktop is "The Soiling of Old Glory." For me, the image captured the complex (albeit negative) emotions that surrounded busing as a solution to school segregation. While we often think of racial antagonisms as rooted in the South, these tensions were present all over the nation. The stain of racism is sometimes deepest in the parts of the country where White and Black live near, but not always next to, where we compete for resources, and where the things to be gained from hatred are the smallest. Boston, in the case of this photo, typifies that reality. Recently Slate ran a slideshow series on the image to accompany the new book on it. I don't have the book, but I wonder could words ever capture the meanings and magnitude of this photo. I surely know I couldn't.

A Sunday Chuckle

So the "national dialog" on race has begun. Here is a HILARIOUS take on it.

Thanks to Atlasien on Rachel's Tavern for posting it first.

Fanning the Flames

Recently I had the opportunity to appear on the O'Reilly factor to discuss the comment of Rev. Jeremiah Wright. While my appearance was short, I got a lot of really positive feedback (one negative comment to date). What is most interesting to me about the controversy of Wright's comments is the degree to which the media will continue to fan these comments into the public eye. The comments by Wright, which were not new, were recently catapulted to the national spotlight. After a disavowal of Wright, a public speech, and a kajillion news stories, there is still this sick media fascination with bringing up the Jeremiah Wright issue. Clearly it's become the media's version of the Boogie Man for Obama's campaign. While I think it is important for this matter to be discussed, I think it's been given more than its fair share of media attention. We'll soon be nearing a month. Can we give it a rest, I'm sure the folks who have made the decision to hate Obama for an affiliation with Wright are no longer even listening. I'm sure the folks who are supporting Obama are no longer even listening. And for the undecided, I wonder why you would be listening to a soundbyte from someone who is not Barack Obama. Can we stop fanning the flames already?