|
|
|
|
|
FILE -
Nurse
manager
Edgar
Ramirez
checks
on IV
fluids
while
talking
to a
COVID-19
patient
at
Providence
Holy
Cross
Medical
Center
in Los
Angeles,
Dec. 13,
2021.
Some
conservatives
are
taking
aim at
policies
that
allow
doctors
to
consider
race as
a risk
factor
when
allocating
scarce
COVID-19
treatments,
saying
the
protocols
discriminate
against
white
people.
Medical
experts
say the
opposition
is
misleading.
(AP
Photo/Jae
C. Hong,
File) |
|
New
conservative
target:
Race as
factor
in COVID
treatment
By TODD
RICHMOND
apnews.com
MADISON,
Wis. -
Some
conservatives
are
taking
aim at
policies
that
allow
doctors
to
consider
race as
a risk
factor
when
allocating
scarce
COVID-19
treatments,
saying
the
protocols
discriminate
against
white
people.
The wave
of
infections
brought
on by
the
omicron
variant
and a
shortage
of
treatments
have
focused
attention
on the
policies.
Medical
experts
say the
opposition
is
misleading.
Health
officials
have
long
said
there is
a strong
case for
considering
race as
one of
many
risk
factors
in
treatment
decisions.
And
there is
no
evidence
that
race
alone is
being
used to
decide
who gets
medicine.
The
issue
came to
the
forefront
last
week
after
Fox News
host
Tucker
Carlson,
former
President
Donald
Trump
and
Republican
Sen.
Marco
Rubio
jumped
on the
policies.
In
recent
days,
conservative
law
firms
have
pressured
a
Missouri-based
health
care
system,
Minnesota
and Utah
to drop
their
protocols
and sued
New York
state
over
allocation
guidelines
or
scoring
systems
that
include
race as
a risk
factor.
JP
Leider,
a senior
fellow
in the
Division
of
Health
Policy
and
Management
at the
University
of
Minnesota
who
helped
develop
that
state’s
allocation
criteria,
noted
that
prioritization
has been
going on
for some
time
because
there
aren’t
enough
treatments
to go
around.
“You
have to
pick who
comes
first,”
Leider
said.
“The
problem
is we
have
extremely
conclusive
evidence
that
(minorities)
across
the
United
States
are
having
worse
COVID
outcomes
compared
to white
folks.
...
Sometimes
it’s
acceptable
to
consider
things
like
race and
ethnicity
when
making
decisions
about
when
resources
get
allocated
at a
societal
level.”
Since
the
pandemic
began,
health
care
systems
and
states
have
been
grappling
with how
to best
distribute
treatments.
The
problem
has only
grown
worse as
the
omicron
variant
has
packed
hospitals
with
COVID-19
patients.
Considerable
evidence
suggests
that
COVID-19
has hit
certain
racial
and
ethnic
groups
harder
than
whites.
Research
shows
that
people
of color
are at a
higher
risk of
severe
illness,
are more
likely
to be
hospitalized
and are
dying
from
COVID-19
at
younger
ages.
Data
also
show
that
minorities
have
been
missing
out on
treatments.
Last
week,
the
Centers
for
Disease
Control
and
Prevention
published
an
analysis
of 41
health
care
systems
that
found
that
Black,
Asian
and
Hispanic
patients
are less
likely
than
whites
to
receive
outpatient
antibody
treatment.
Omicron
has
rendered
two
widely
available
antibody
treatments
ineffective,
leaving
only
one,
which is
in short
supply.
The Food
and Drug
Administration
has
given
health
care
providers
guidance
on when
that
treatment,
sotrovimab,
should
be used,
including
a list
of
medical
conditions
that put
patients
at high
risk of
severe
outcomes
from
COVID-19.
The
FDA’s
guidance
says
other
factors
such as
race or
ethnicity
might
also put
patients
at
higher
risk.
The
CDC’s
list of
high-risk
underlying
conditions
notes
that age
is the
strongest
risk
factor
for
severe
disease
and
lists
more
than a
dozen
medical
conditions.
It also
suggests
that
doctors
and
nurses
“carefully
consider
potential
additional
risks of
COVID-19
illness
for
patients
who are
members
of
certain
racial
and
ethnic
minority
groups.”
State
guidelines
generally
recommend
that
doctors
give
priority
for the
drugs to
those at
the
highest
risk,
including
cancer
patients,
transplant
recipients
and
people
who have
lung
disease
or are
pregnant.
Some
states,
including
Wisconsin,
have
implemented
policies
that bar
race as
a
factor,
but
others
have
allowed
it.
St.
Louis-based
SSM
Health,
which
serves
patients
in
Illinois,
Missouri,
Oklahoma
and
Wisconsin,
required
patients
to score
20
points
on a
risk
calculator
to
qualify
for
COVID-19
antibody
treatment.
Non-whites
automatically
got
seven
points.
State
health
officials
in Utah
adopted
a
similar
risk
calculator
that
grants
people
two
points
if
they’re
not
white.
Minnesota’s
health
department
guidelines
automatically
assigned
two
points
to
minorities.
Four
points
was
enough
to
qualify
for
treatment.
New York
state
health
officials’
guidelines
authorize
antiviral
treatments
if
patients
meet
five
criteria.
One is
having
“a
medical
condition
or other
factors
that
increase
their
risk for
severe
illness.”
One of
those
factors
is being
a
minority,
according
to the
guidelines.
The
protocols
have
become a
talking
point
for
Republicans
after
The Wall
Street
Journal
ran an
op-ed by
political
commentators
John
Judis
and Ruy
Teixeira
this
month
complaining
that New
York’s
policy
is
unfair,
unjustified
and
possibly
illegal.
Carlson
jumped
on
Utah’s
and
Minnesota’s
policies
last
week,
saying
“you win
if
you’re
not
white.”
Alvin
Tillery,
a
political
scientist
at
Northwestern
University,
called
the
issue a
winning
political
strategy
for
Trump
and
Republicans
looking
to
motivate
their
predominantly
white
base
ahead of
midterm
elections
in
November.
He said
conservatives
are
twisting
the
narrative,
noting
that
race is
only one
of a
multitude
of
factors
in every
allocation
policy.
“It does
gin up
their
people,
gives
them a
chance
in
elections,”
Tillery
said.
After
the
Wisconsin
Institute
for Law
and
Liberty,
a
conservative
law firm
based in
Madison,
sent a
letter
to SSM
Health
on
Friday
demanding
that it
drop
race
from its
risk
calculator,
SSM
responded
that it
already
did so
last
year as
health
experts’
understanding
of
COVID-19
evolved.
“While
early
versions
of risk
calculators
across
the
nation
appropriately
included
race and
gender
criteria
based on
initial
outcomes,
SSM
Health
has
continued
to
evaluate
and
update
our
protocols
weekly
to
reflect
the most
up-to-date
clinical
evidence
available,”
the
company
said in
a
statement.
“As a
result,
race and
gender
criteria
are no
longer
utilized.”
America
First
Legal, a
conservative-leaning
law firm
based in
Washington,
D.C.,
filed a
federal
lawsuit
Sunday
against
New York
demanding
that the
state
remove
race
from its
allocation
criteria.
The same
firm
warned
Minnesota
and Utah
last
week
that
they
should
drop
race
from
their
preference
factors
or face
lawsuits.
Erin
Silk, a
spokeswoman
for New
York
state’s
health
department,
declined
to
comment
on the
lawsuit.
She said
the
state’s
guidance
is based
on CDC
guidelines
and that
race is
one of
many
factors
that
doctors
should
consider
when
deciding
who gets
treatment.
She
stressed
that
doctors
should
consider
a
patient’s
total
medical
history
and that
no one
is
refused
treatment
because
of race
or any
other
demographic
qualifier.
Minnesota
health
officials
dropped
race
from the
state’s
criteria
a day or
two
before
receiving
America
Legal
First’s
demands,
Leider
said.
They
said in
a
statement
that
they’re
committed
to
serving
all
Minnesotans
equitably
and are
constantly
reviewing
their
policies.
The
statement
did not
mention
the
letter
from
America
Legal
First.
Leider
said the
state is
now
picking
treatment
recipients
through
a
lottery.
Utah
dropped
race and
ethnicity
from its
risk
score
calculator
on
Friday,
among
other
changes,
citing
new
federal
guidance
and the
need to
make
sure
classifications
comply
with
federal
law. The
state’s
health
department
said
that
instead
of using
those as
factors
in
eligibility
for
treatments,
it would
“work
with
communities
of color
to
improve
access
to
treatments”
in other
ways.
Leider
finds
the
criticism
of the
race-inclusive
policies
disingenuous.
“It’s
easy to
bring in
identity
politics
and set
up
choices
between
really
wealthy
folks of
one type
and
folks of
other
types,”
he said.
“It’s
hard to
take
seriously
those
kinds of
comparisons.
They
don’t
seem
very
fair to
reality.”
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|