Thank you, Vinay, for raising awareness on this topic yet again. The universities should be worried. I wouldn’t want to go against Harmeet Dhillon either. She’s exactly what this country needs. Consequences must be swift and painful for these universities otherwise they will not stop these practices.
Dhillon is more than a capable advocate. Let America hope that these efforts are part of the long struggle to undo the nonsense that Marxist ideologies have imposed. They started in the Universities. That is the place to attack.
My friends and I tell each other we now have to start looking at where our young doctors got their degrees. Something we honestly never did before. We are blessed to live in SF with some of the top Doctors so we've just taken it for granted that our doctors (who are now all retiring) got into med school based on merit. Ha! What a concept.
I have reached the point where if a doctor is under 35 and is URM I will not go to that doctor. Because I know that DEI and not merit are huge factors in many/most med schools and I refuse to risk my health.
Not exactly what these DEI commissars were hoping for, but no sane person can afford to do otherwise.
If a doctor is under 35 and is URM (Under Represented Minority) I will not go to that doctor. Because I know that DEI and not merit are huge factors in many/most med schools as of 10-15 years ago and I refuse to risk my health. Not just for admission but for grades and graduation.
Not exactly what these DEI commissars were aiming for with their illegal policies.
Yes, Harmeet is a formidable attorney (she was one of the lawyers for my SCOTUS case against CA covid tyranny that we won) and she is passionately dedicated to eliminating racial discrimination. I salute her.
I think you’ve addressed how racial quotas can be filled within the university academic structures.
I find it quite curious that no one openly acknowledges the homogeneity of culture at the very top academic leadership.
I think it’s because acknowledging the same is likely to get someone banned from academia.
But since I’m already banned from academia, I would just like to point out that the puppet masters wear the same hat and devolve reality using the same coded language.
Thank you Director Prasad for informing readers about Ivy League and UC violating Supreme Court ruling on race and admissions. While UC Davis is expected to adhere to federal law, and not damage its reputation by chasing after fake-science research findings; I suspect that DEI directors in Sacramento are also involved. When Governor Newsom implemented DEI in California, (2018-2019); he likely designated a DEI director for each state agency, department, bureau, committee and commission. The UC system is a CA Department. I imagine that DEI directors instruct universities to continue using race criteria for admissions despite the Supreme Court.
What we should keep in mind is that admission to medical school is admission to the funnel that results in "doctor". it is almost universally agreed that there are far more qaulified people spplying to med school than are accepted. The Us lags well behind most developed countries in doctors/population, despite importing so many doctors. little Cuba is able to proportionally produce far more qualified doctors than the US (and for those who sneer at the quality of non-US doctors, look at all the metrics of health where the US lags, which makes it hard to say the quality of US doctors is superior). So there is a selection process, all we can ask of it is that the criteria are objective and non-discriminatory.
Second, being admitted to med school doesnot mean the person is a qualified doctor. That part is created by the learning acquired in med school and internship-residency, and can be objectively measured to some degree.
It seems to me that much of your argument against the schools is that there is a positive association of the metrics they use (eg, socio-economicstatus) with race and that therefore you cannot use it. Yet many of the criteria actually used result in a negative association with race. In effect, , a criteria that allows more blacks to get in is ipso facto disallowed, whereas a criteria that means less blacks get in is allowed. This iscreverse discrimination. Current criteria result in 20% of medical school students have aa parent who is a doctor, and most med students come form upper income bracket; suggesting that discrimination is going on. Underlying all that is that noone really knows what factors predict who is a"good" doctor (once we've defined what a "good doctor" is-- reminding us of the plato dialogues on the nature of 'good') which should mean that we allow medical schools leeway in creating objective admission criteria. And no, leaving a group of lawyers sitting on the supreme court to create those criteria is not the democratic way to do so. And no, creating a mandarin like test like the MCAT's with all its cultural bias is also not the way to do so.
I wonder if the liberal professors working at these universities would choose a DEI heart surgeon if they needed one??
Thank you, Vinay, for raising awareness on this topic yet again. The universities should be worried. I wouldn’t want to go against Harmeet Dhillon either. She’s exactly what this country needs. Consequences must be swift and painful for these universities otherwise they will not stop these practices.
Dhillon is more than a capable advocate. Let America hope that these efforts are part of the long struggle to undo the nonsense that Marxist ideologies have imposed. They started in the Universities. That is the place to attack.
Thank heavens for Harmeet Dhillon!
My friends and I tell each other we now have to start looking at where our young doctors got their degrees. Something we honestly never did before. We are blessed to live in SF with some of the top Doctors so we've just taken it for granted that our doctors (who are now all retiring) got into med school based on merit. Ha! What a concept.
I have reached the point where if a doctor is under 35 and is URM I will not go to that doctor. Because I know that DEI and not merit are huge factors in many/most med schools and I refuse to risk my health.
Not exactly what these DEI commissars were hoping for, but no sane person can afford to do otherwise.
If a doctor is under 35 and is URM (Under Represented Minority) I will not go to that doctor. Because I know that DEI and not merit are huge factors in many/most med schools as of 10-15 years ago and I refuse to risk my health. Not just for admission but for grades and graduation.
Not exactly what these DEI commissars were aiming for with their illegal policies.
DEI, formerly known as "affirmative action", has been a guiding policy in medical schools since the mid-1970's. Meritocracy was buried decades ago.
Yes, Harmeet is a formidable attorney (she was one of the lawyers for my SCOTUS case against CA covid tyranny that we won) and she is passionately dedicated to eliminating racial discrimination. I salute her.
I think you’ve addressed how racial quotas can be filled within the university academic structures.
I find it quite curious that no one openly acknowledges the homogeneity of culture at the very top academic leadership.
I think it’s because acknowledging the same is likely to get someone banned from academia.
But since I’m already banned from academia, I would just like to point out that the puppet masters wear the same hat and devolve reality using the same coded language.
Thank you Director Prasad for informing readers about Ivy League and UC violating Supreme Court ruling on race and admissions. While UC Davis is expected to adhere to federal law, and not damage its reputation by chasing after fake-science research findings; I suspect that DEI directors in Sacramento are also involved. When Governor Newsom implemented DEI in California, (2018-2019); he likely designated a DEI director for each state agency, department, bureau, committee and commission. The UC system is a CA Department. I imagine that DEI directors instruct universities to continue using race criteria for admissions despite the Supreme Court.
What we should keep in mind is that admission to medical school is admission to the funnel that results in "doctor". it is almost universally agreed that there are far more qaulified people spplying to med school than are accepted. The Us lags well behind most developed countries in doctors/population, despite importing so many doctors. little Cuba is able to proportionally produce far more qualified doctors than the US (and for those who sneer at the quality of non-US doctors, look at all the metrics of health where the US lags, which makes it hard to say the quality of US doctors is superior). So there is a selection process, all we can ask of it is that the criteria are objective and non-discriminatory.
Second, being admitted to med school doesnot mean the person is a qualified doctor. That part is created by the learning acquired in med school and internship-residency, and can be objectively measured to some degree.
It seems to me that much of your argument against the schools is that there is a positive association of the metrics they use (eg, socio-economicstatus) with race and that therefore you cannot use it. Yet many of the criteria actually used result in a negative association with race. In effect, , a criteria that allows more blacks to get in is ipso facto disallowed, whereas a criteria that means less blacks get in is allowed. This iscreverse discrimination. Current criteria result in 20% of medical school students have aa parent who is a doctor, and most med students come form upper income bracket; suggesting that discrimination is going on. Underlying all that is that noone really knows what factors predict who is a"good" doctor (once we've defined what a "good doctor" is-- reminding us of the plato dialogues on the nature of 'good') which should mean that we allow medical schools leeway in creating objective admission criteria. And no, leaving a group of lawyers sitting on the supreme court to create those criteria is not the democratic way to do so. And no, creating a mandarin like test like the MCAT's with all its cultural bias is also not the way to do so.
I’d like to hear what (legal) policies Dr. Prasad would propose to make college admissions more “equitable “?