Race, ethnicity affect likelihood of finding a suitable unrelated stem cell donor for cancer patients
sciencedaily.com
Bone Marrow Transplants: When Race Is an Issue
content.time.com
Race matters when a patient needs a stem cell or marrow transplant
washingtonpost.com
Effects of race on survival after stem cell transplantation
sciencedirect.com
Is this across the world or in certain countries?
define race
>according to self report
not very mechanistically sound
>these papers about rare medical situations affirm my emotional and political beliefs!
go back to /pol/
2. Ageymang C & Bhopal R. Is the blood pressure of people from African origin adults in the UK higher or lower than that in European origin white people? A review of cross-sectional data. Journal of Human Hypertension. 2003; 17(8). 523-534
3. Cappuccio FP et al. Hypertension and ethnicity: prevalence and level of detection and management in the community in England. American Journal of Hypertension. 1997; 10, 22A.
4. Cappuccio FP. Ethnicity and cardiovascular risk: variation in people of African ancestry and South Asian origin. Journal of Human Hypertension. 1997; 11, 571-576.
5. Primatesta P et al. Blood pressure levels and hypertension status among ethnic groups in England. Journal of Human Hypertension. 2000; 14, 143-148.
6. Lip GYH et al. Ethnicity and cardiovascular disease prevention in the United Kingdom: a practical approach to management. Journal of Human Hypertension. 2007; 21, 183-211.
7. He FJ et al. Importance of the renin system in determining blood pressure fall with salt restriction in black and white hypertensives. Hypertension. 2001; 32, 820-824
8. He FJ et al. Effect of Modest Salt reduction on Blood Pressure, Urinary Albumin and pulse Wave velocity in which black and Asian mild hypertensives. Hypertension. 2009; 54, 482-488.
9. Vollmer WM et al. Effects of diet and sodium intake on blood pressure; subgroup analysis of the DASH sodium trial. Annals of Internal Medicine. 2001; 135, 1019-1028
10. Swift et al. Modest salt reduction lowers blood pressure and urine protein excretion in black hypertensives. Hypertension. 2005;46:1-5
is the difference in probability of finding a suitable donor between (self-identified) races actually statistically significant?
The researchers concluded that the difficulties in finding well-matched donors in some minority groups were likely related to the degree of genetic heterogeneity within those groups, as well as their underrepresentation in donor pools.
They concluded that when compared to Caucasians, African-Americans, Hispanics and Native Americans have greater difficulty in finding a suitably matched unrelated donor, and less likelihood of successfully reaching HCT. Other barriers to HCT include age and disease progression.
this just about finding a donor, what if black people donate bone marrow less for whatever various non-genetic reasons
Yes, some people are more related to each other than others but racial stratification is a societal thing
how about a non-medical journal article? Like a straight biology article defining races, even with tolerance ranges.
Ethnicity isn't race, look at asians they all look asian but they're different ethnicities.
>The above studies highlight both smaller donor pools and disproportionate representation of ethnic and racial groups as contributors to decreased match rates. However, studies have also shown that some ethnic/racial groups have more diverse HLA alleles and would be less likely to find a match even if they had an equal proportion of potential donors as Caucasians. A 1995 study by Beatty et al. demonstrated that African–Americans are more polymorphic with respect to HLA and are therefore less likely to find donors at any given registry size.[16] The authors demonstrated this in two ways. First, they modelled new HLA phenotype acquisition, which is the chance that a newly recruited stem cell donor has a novel combination of HLA alleles. They showed that 90 % of newly recruited African–American donors had new HLA phenotypes, compared to 72 % or 74 % respectively for Asian–American or Caucasian donors. Second, the authors modelled match rates in hypothetical registries composed of donors solely of the same ethnic group. They found that Hispanic and African–American people in these hypothetical ethnically–homogenous registries were still less likely to find a match than were Caucasian, Asian–American, or Native American people. Another study by Mori et al. examined HLA allele phenotypes of the NMDP donors. These authors found that African–American and Asian–American people had a large number of HLA alleles unique to their ethnic groups, whereas Caucasian, Latin American, and Native American people shared a large number of common HLA alleles.[26]
tldr: matching by race/ethnicity increases likelihood of suitable donation. However some groups would still be fucked due to their HLA types being too "new" and can't be properly matched even with a bigger donation rate by same race.
Op omitted this, I wonder why?
>Op omitted this, I wonder why?
I didn't "omit" it, I simply wasn't aware of it, but I can add it for the next thread if you'd like.
>race
No such thing.
>correlation means causation
Not even an argument.
That means race isn't scientifically rigorous. race is pseudoscience.
define 'define'
you cant
But you can't even get a transfusion from a sibling with a different blood type. Must be a separate race?
>That means race isn't scientifically rigorous
How does it mean that?
>>correlation means causation
Who are you quoting?
Look up race definition.
>Look up race definition.
Why does "I didn't "omit" it, I simply wasn't aware of it, but I can add it for the next thread if you'd like." mean "race isn't scientifically rigorous"?
If he thinks throwing a bunch of non-direct correlations is proof of causation, I think he needs to rethink his political agenda.
obvious /pol/ falseflag
try and be a little more subtle next time
Wrong. That post wasn't refering that.
>If he thinks throwing a bunch of non-direct correlations is proof of causation
I'm not a "he".
Where does it say that?
>That post wasn't refering that.
What was it referring to?
Read the post again.
OP at least try to hide your bad science if you're actually trying to push this conspiracy theory race is a thing shite
>Read the post again.
You quoted my post "That means race isn't scientifically rigorous. race is pseudoscience." and said "That means race isn't scientifically rigorous.". How does that follow?
You quoted my post "I didn't "omit" it, I simply wasn't aware of it, but I can add it for the next thread if you'd like."*
>OP at least try to hide your bad science if you're actually trying to push this conspiracy theory race is a thing shite
If you think its "bad science" then feel free to go get a transplant from someone of a different race.
Get a transplant from a sibling of a different blood type.
>Get a transplant from a sibling of a different blood type.
At least try to hide your bad science if you're actually trying to push this conspiracy theory blood type is a thing shite
Look up race definition.
>Look up race definition.
Why?
Wrong. That post wasn't refering that.
>Wrong. That post wasn't refering that.
What was it referring to?
>why
To understand the post.
Read the post again.
>To understand the post.
I already know what race is though.
>Read the post again.
You quoted my post "I didn't "omit" it, I simply wasn't aware of it, but I can add it for the next thread if you'd like." and said "That means race isn't scientifically rigorous.".
Care to explain?
Wrong. That post wasn't refering that.
>Care to explain?
Explain what?
>Wrong. That post wasn't refering that.
What was it referring to?
...
Subspecies of homo sapieans.
I already know what race is though.
What would you like me to explain?
Read the post again.
>there are no diferances between white bears and brown bears
Same thing right?Oh wait its not about humans so they are actualy diferant right?
Go back o tumblr
>Read the post again.
You quoted my post "I didn't "omit" it, I simply wasn't aware of it, but I can add it for the next thread if you'd like." and said "That means race isn't scientifically rigorous.".
...
I already know what race is though.
What would you like me to explain?
>difference between individuals demonstrate race. Yeah, the big nose race, the lactose intolerant race, the squatting race...etc. lol
>2018
>People still think humans are one metapopulation
haha
Wrong. That post wasn't refering that.
What evidance do you have that race is not real?
>Wrong. That post wasn't refering that.
What was it referring to?
It's up to race supporters to demonstrate race is science.
>evidance do you have that race is not real
No such thing.
Also its not about diferances between induviduals but rather diferances between groups, which clearly exist.
>difference between set of individuals demonstrate race.
Yeah, the big nose race, the lactose intolerant race, the squatting race...etc. lol
Read the post again.
>Read the post again.
You quoted my post "I didn't "omit" it, I simply wasn't aware of it, but I can add it for the next thread if you'd like." and said "That means race isn't scientifically rigorous.".
medicine is kind of empirical rather than analytical - like whatever works to save lives right
Population genetics would be the area of expertise is you wanted to prove race real as biological concept
''race'' is just a fancy way of humans to describe their subspecies.
And subspecies my frend is a real sciance.
So you want to redefine the race concept?
but species and subspecies have to be defined phylogenetically
Wrong. That post wasn't refering that.
>Wrong. That post wasn't refering that.
What was it referring to?
Read the post again.
>Read the post again.
What was it referring to?
Read the post again.
>Read the post again.
What was it referring to?
This is a non issue, blacks and mixed race people cannot find donnors? First they have to live long enough and not die in a shooting.
Also look at africa, they dont even know what stem cells are and yet africa population is increasing exponiantelly
Read the post again.
Yes, becose it dosen't suit reality.
And human subspecies aka races dosen't have that?
>Yes, becose it dosen't suit reality.
What definition would you prefer?
Same as just subspecies
This is perfectly reasonable, if you understand anything about genetics and human evolution. Most of the differences in genetic variation across geographic regions has to do with the immune system, as one would expect, rather than things like intelligence.
It's up to race supporters to demonstrate race is science.
Yes, they don't
Alright, the concept of subspecies is usually used to separate species with good genetic or ecological evidence, such as species that have been divided and do not mate with each and have undergone some genetic differentiation.
Given that humans have very low overall genetic diversity and we are a large interbreeding population with almost no genetic differentiation, give me a scientific reason humans should be divided into subspecies.
Race and IQ diferances
>ihb4 but muh enviroment
Enviroment acords for about 20% of IQ 80% is pure genetics.
Eshenazi jews score around 110IQ Asins Score on AVERAGE 105IQ Whites 100IQ African americans (who have around 20% white genes and live in better enviroment then their african counterparts) 85IQ
Africans 70IQ
Australian aboriginals 60 IQ
Yes there are expections there can be black who scores 100IQ or more but they are rare.
Also IQ is only ONE mayor diferance between human subspecies.
Okay mister smartass what about breeds of dogs?Some have longer necks some are faster then others some have longer furr ETC and people have no peoblem recoqnising that breeds are REAL why does it sudently change once we talk about humans?Humans are animals just like everyone else and i understand its a sensitive topic but world dosen't give a shit about your feelings everything needs to be seen with cold rational logic.
>everything needs to be seen with cold rational logic
good luck arguing with cold rational logic against oestrogen fuelled brains
And then there's the fabled (You) race with an IQ of 50. Notice the quality of the post, and it is quite apparent. It is said this race never leaves the confines of their natural basement habitats, so they are rarely seen in person.
>gives you facts and destroys your argument
B...bu....but ur retard xDDDDD
Go back to tumblr safe space you ignorant fuck, if you don't like answers don't ask questions.
Aside from the fact that we are now saying random Veeky Forums posts constitute facts, I was just pointing out the hypocrisy that the poster is clearly very dumb. I assume they're also white.
>Non-whites have considerably worse health care related outcomes than whites.
STOP THE PRESSES!!!
>iq
Not science.
Intelegance is one of most known parts of human syhology and IQ tests work preaty well to determine ones intelegance, give me proff IQ is not a good mesurement of intelegane.
What's your IQ?
128
>128
Why haven't you learned how to spell then?
I have dyslexia but i am able to speak 3 languages and learning 4th
I can agree with the variations in genetic pre-dispositions, but I'd like to see more evidence on compliance, poor treatment compliance (especially post-graft medication) and health choices (such as smoking, drinking, diet) definitely would change mortality outcome. I can't help but notice all the sites are US, do donor recipients have to pay privately for post-transplant meds, if so then the socio-economic status would affect medication adherence.
You make me mad for some reason. Are you a troll or literally retarded
Wow you are so smart.
>give me proof
It's up to iq supporters to demonstrate iq is science. Which it isn't.
Because you are stupider than me.