The brutalisation of Jacob Blake and murders of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, Ahmaud
Arbery, Tony McDade, and countless others—coupled with horrifying statistics about
the disproportionate burden of COVID-19 on Black and Brown communities—have forced
the USA and the world to reckon with how structural racism conditions survival. Although
clinicians often imagine themselves as beneficent caregivers, it is increasingly clear
that medicine is not a stand-alone institution immune to racial inequities, but rather
is an institution of structural racism. A pervasive example of this participation
is race-based medicine, the system by which research characterising race as an essential,
biological variable, translates into clinical practice, leading to inequitable care.
In this Viewpoint, we discuss examples of race-based medicine, how it is learned,
and how it perpetuates health-care disparities. We introduce race-conscious medicine
as an alternative approach that emphasises racism, rather than race, as a key determinant
of illness and health, encouraging providers to focus only on the most relevant data
to mitigate health inequities.
Research in clinical medicine and epidemiology requires explicit hypotheses; however,
hypotheses involving race are frequently implicit and circular, relying on conventional
wisdom that Black and Brown people are genetically distinct from White people.
1
This common knowledge descends from European colonialisation, at which time race was
developed as a tool to divide and control populations worldwide. Race is thus a social
and power construct, with meanings that have shifted over time to suit political goals,
including to assert biological inferiority of dark-skinned populations.
2
In fact, race is a poor proxy for human variation. Physical characteristics used to
identify racial groups vary with geography and do not correspond to underlying biological
traits. Genetic research shows that humans cannot be divided into biologically distinct
subcategories.3, 4 Furthermore, ongoing overlap and mixture between populations erodes
any meaningful genetic difference.
5
Despite the absence of meaningful correspondence between race and genetics, race is
repeatedly used as a shortcut in clinical medicine. For instance, Black patients are
presumed to have greater muscle mass than patients of other races and estimates of
their renal function are accordingly adjusted.
6
On the basis of the understanding that Asian patients have higher visceral body fat
than do people of other races, they are considered to be at risk for diabetes at lower
body-mass indices.
7
Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors are considered less effective in Black
patients than in White patients, and they might not be prescribed to Black patients
with hypertension (table
).1, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26,
27, 28 We argue that such approaches are harmful and unnecessary, contributing to
health-care disparities among the exact populations they are intended to help.
Table
Examples of race-based medicine, the potential harm to patients, and race-conscious
alternatives
How race is used
Rationale for race-based management
Potential harm
Race-conscious approach
eGFR
6
eGFR for Black patients is multiplied by 1·16–1·21 the eGFR for White patients, depending
on the equation used
Black patients are presumed to have higher muscle mass and creatinine generation rate
than patients of other races
Black patients might experience delayed dialysis and transplant referral8, 9
Use eGFR equations that do not adjust for race (eg, CKD-EPI Cystatin C).
10
BMI risk for diabetes
7
Asian patients considered at risk for diabetes at BMI ≥23 vs 25 for patients of other
races
Asian patients are presumed to develop more visceral than peripheral adiposity than
patients of other races at similar BMI levels, increasing risk for insulin resistance
7
Asian patients screened for diabetes despite absence of other risk factors might experience
increased stigma and distrust of medical providers
11
Screen patients with lower BMIs on the basis of indications of increased body fat
(eg, body roundness,
12
body fat percentage), not based on race
FRAX
13
Probability of fracture is adjusted according to geography or minority status, or
both
Different geographical and ethnic minority populations are presumed to have varied
relative risks for fracture on the basis of epidemiological data
Some populations, including Black women, might be less likely to be screened for osteoporosis
than other populations
14
Screen patients for osteoporosis on the basis of clinical risk criteria, rather than
race; counteract existing biases that place Black patients at risk because of racial
essentialist beliefs about variation in bone density
15
PFT
16
Reference values for pulmonary function are adjusted for race and ethnicity
Racial and ethnic minority groups are presumed to have varied lung function on the
basis of epidemiological data
Black patients might experience increased difficulty obtaining disability support
for pulmonary disease
17
Use unadjusted measures of lung function for all patients; counteract existing biases
that harm Black patients because of racial essentialist beliefs about variation in
lung capacity
18
JNC 8 Hypertension Guidelines
19
Treatment algorithm provides alternate pathways for Black and non-Black patients
ACE-inhibitor use associated with higher risk of stroke and poorer control of blood
pressure in Black patients than in patients of other races
Black patients might be less likely to achieve hypertension control and require multiple
antihypertensive agents
20
Consider all antihypertensive options for blood pressure control in Black patients;
adjust as needed to achieve goals and manage adverse effects
Paediatric UTI diagnosis
21
White race in girls and non-Black race in boys are considered independent risk factors
for UTI
Study of febrile children in the emergency department found highest prevalence of
UTI among White girls and non-Black boys
22
Experimental data suggests that these guidelines could affect management of UTI by
race
23
Treat UTI in children on the basis of clinical presentation, regardless of race
ASCVD risk estimation
Race-specific equations included to estimate ASCVD risk
ASCVD events higher for Black patients than patients of other races with otherwise
equivalent risk burden
24
Black patients might experience more adverse effects from recommended statin therapy,
including persistent muscle damage
25
Recommend preventive therapy on the basis of clinical metrics and comorbidities; consider
pathways by which structural racism might increase cardiovascular risk among Black
patients and promote resources to reduce racial stress and trauma
26
Eltrombopag dosing
East Asian patients receive half the starting dose compared with non-east Asian patients
Limited pharmacokinetic studies suggest reduced metabolism of eltrombopag in patients
of East Asian descent
27
Some East Asian patients might receive inappropriate dosing
28
Initiate same starting dose for all patients, regardless of race, and adjust as needed
on the basis of platelet response
Examples of race-based medicine were chosen to represent multiple racial groups (eg,
White, Black, Asian) and domains in which race is essentialised as biological (eg,
pharmacokinetics, bone density, lung capacity). ACE=angiotensin-converting enzyme.
ASCVD=atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. BMI=body-mass index. CKD-EPI=Chronic
Kidney Disease Epidemiologic Collaboration equation. eGFR=estimated glomerular filtration
rate. FRAX=fracture risk assessment score. JNC 8=Eighth Joint National Committee.
PFT=pulmonary function test. UTI=urinary tract infection.
Emerging scholarship underscores the harms of these race-adjusted practices,29, 30
even as some continue to defend them, touting their ability to capture yet-understood
differences in clinical measures between racial groups.31, 32 However, propagation
of race-based medicine promotes racial stereotyping, diminishes the need for research
identifying more precise biomarkers underpinning disparities, and condones false notions
about the biological inferiority of Black and Brown people. Hence, even if significant
findings or clinical anecdotes support the use of racially tailored practices, they
should be rigorously critiqued and mediating variables, such as structural conditions,
should be analysed accordingly.
Many medical students enter their training with racial biases that are unconsciously
reinforced. Race is often learned as an independent risk factor for disease, rather
than as a mediator of structural inequalities resulting from racist policies. Health
disparities are presented without context, leading students to develop harmful stereotypes
on the basis of the belief that some populations are more diseased than others. Students
learn to associate race with disease conditions, such as sarcoidosis, cystic fibrosis,
hypertension, and focal segmental glomerulonephritis, which upholds their implicit
understandings of race as a biological trait.33, 34 Professors might misleadingly
equate genetic ancestry, which could be meaningful when traced to a narrowly circumscribed
population of origin (eg, Biafada people), with race (eg, African ancestry).35, 36
On the wards, students learn that race is relevant to treatment decisions and have
inadequate power to question the racialised assumptions of their supervisors.37, 38,
39, 40 In this way, race-based medicine is quickly propagated.
Such racially tailored care might drive medical errors and increase health inequities.
For instance, medical students who endorsed the false beliefs that Black patients
had longer nerve endings and thicker skin than White patients also rated Black patients
as feeling less pain and offered less accurate treatment recommendations in mock medical
cases.
41
This racialised belief in diminished pain sensitivity of Black patients translates
to consistently inadequate pain management and their reduced likelihood of receiving
opioid prescriptions for severe pain.42, 43 Furthermore, race-adjusted instruments
might also affect disease management. The assessment of renal function in Black patients
is based on a higher estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), which might mask
kidney failure, delaying dialysis and listing for transplant.9, 10 Race corrections
for pulmonary lung function tests also reduce the likelihood that Black patients can
obtain disability support for their lung disease.
18
These examples show the necessity of transitioning from a race-based system of clinical
care to race-conscious practice. Adopting the language of race-conscious policy, we
accordingly provide the following recommendations for race-conscious medicine.
First, racist, racially tailored practices that propagate inequity should be avoided.
Race should not be used to make inferences about physiological function in clinical
practice. Race-adjusted tools should be abandoned or replaced with more precise analytics
than currently used. For instance, the health systems of the University of Washington,
the University of California San Francisco, the Beth Israel Deaconess, and the Vanderbilt
University eliminated the race-correction for eGFR. Clinical teams should reconsider
the use of race in the opening sentence of an encounter note and instead consider
including relevant indicators of structural vulnerability (eg, Spanish-speaking woman
aged 41 years instead of Black woman aged 41 years). Race should be used to assess
for experiences of discrimination and refer to affinity-based support services. Second,
it should be taught that racial health disparities are a consequence of structural
racism. Beginning in preclinical education, racial disparities in disease should be
explained within the framework of the structural determinants of health, defining
race as a social and power construct. Awareness of institutional inequities as a root
cause of ongoing racial injustice promotes structural competency in clinical practice.
44
In addition, phenotypic race should be distinguished from genetic ancestry and students
should be discouraged from narrowing differential diagnoses and management on the
basis of perceived race. Third, resolutions denouncing race-based medicine across
clinical leadership should be adopted. Effective action to eradicate race-based medicine
will require cooperation across clinical leadership, including those professional
societies responsible for setting practitioner standards. Societies for health-care
practitioners should consider resolutions denouncing the use of race-based medicine
in their trainings, guidelines, and other publications, and require that race be explicitly
characterised as a social and power construct when describing disease risk factors.
Black, Indigenous, and other people of colour should be included in (and rewarded
for their contributions to) decision making processes to reform disease management
guidelines.
45
Some forward-thinking societies have already made strides to advance such resolutions.
Finally, clinical research should be used to examine structural barriers, rather than
using race as a proxy for biology. Clinical journals should include in their publication
guidelines instructions to avoid the use of race as a proxy for biological variables,
such as genetics, pharmacokinetics, and metabolism. Hypotheses using racial labels
should make the authors' definition and operationalisation of race explicit. Additionally,
structural barriers to health that overlap with race should be considered, including
socioeconomic status, discrimination, transportation, environmental exposures, criminal
history, documentation status, English proficiency, and neighbourhood violence. Models
and measures of structural racism that account for policy influences can be developed
and used to assess health impacts, rather than solely including race as an independent
variable.46, 47, 48
Our multi-pronged, race-conscious approach seeks to reform race-based medicine across
clinical practice, education, leadership, and research (figure
). These recommendations aim to promote conscious, anti-racist practices over unchecked
assumptions that uphold racial hierarchies.
49
In doing so, medicine can make substantial strides toward achieving health equity.
Figure
How race-based medicine leads to racial health inequities
An alternative approach to race-conscious medicine; defined as medical practice and
pedagogy that accounts for how structural racism determines illness and health.
Health care is merely one institution plagued by structural racism: a comprehensive
antidote to racial health disparities will require collaboration across sectors of
housing, education, transportation, criminal justice, and environmental justice. We
should encourage health-care practitioners to leverage their cultural capital to advocate
for antiracist policies. Through conscious effort and collaboration, health-care providers
can work towards racial equity within and beyond the walls of examination rooms.