On Racism in Scientific Worth
Black scientists are significantly less likely than white researchers to win grants from the National Institutes of Health, according to an audit released Thursday that confirmed disturbing suspicions inside the agency about a lingering bias against African Americans.
The analysis of data from more than 40,000 researchers who submitted more than 80,000 grant applications to NIH between 2000 and 2006 found that only about 16 percent of those from black applicants were approved, compared with about 29 percent of those from white scientists.
Even after the researchers accounted for other factors that could help explain the discrepancy, such as differences in scientists' education and training, black applicants were still about 10 percentage points less likely than whites to get NIH funding, the researchers reported. About 27 percent of white applicants' requests were successful, compared with only about 17 percent of blacks'.
Asians applying for money appeared to be slightly less likely than whites to get grants, but that gap disappeared when the researchers matched equally qualified white and Asian U.S. citizens. Hispanics were about as successful as whites.
The findings are troubling because they indicate that race remains a significant factor in who gets funding for research into diabetes, cancer, heart disease and other health problems from the premier funder of biomedical research, the researchers said.
(Boldface accent added)
It's a pretty heavy discrepancy, such that NIH's own eggheads were able to figure out there might be a problem. The present report is the result of a University of Kansas study stemming from a prior internal audit, in which someone apparently figured out they had one hell of an appearance of imbalance.
NIH Director Francis Collins said the "situation is not acceptable" and that the "data is deeply troubling".
Donna Ginther, the University of Kansas department director who led the study, apparently could not figure other explanations for the outcome:
Ginther and her colleagues tried several methods to explain the discrepancy, including analyzing whether differences in the topics being proposed for study by blacks or the types of studies they hoped to conduct might be playing a role, but they did not identify any clear explanation. The researchers speculated, however, that several factors could be playing a role. Black scientists, for example, might not be as plugged into professional "peer-review" networks that judge scientific proposals as white researchers. They might also tend to work at institutions that offer less support.
"I don't think it's overt racism. I'm not thinking someone is going through the applications and saying: 'Black, do not fund,'" Ginther said. "But it could be a matter of networks — that these investigators are not as well connected as others. Or it could be the resources of their home institutions in preparing the applications."
(Boldface accent added)
Collins explained: "I would like not to believe that is intentional bias, but I can't exclude, after talking to lots of colleagues, the possibility that even today in 2011 in our society there is still an unconscious, insidious form bias that subtly influences opinions of people."
It's kind of hard to say racism is dead in this country when even NIH is running out of alternative explanations for the appearance of racism.
I mean, sure, we could say it's the NIH and University of Kansas Center of Science Technology and Economic Policy, and assert that as these are public institutions they aren't being scientific, because, well, you know, they're gov'mint, and sciency, and lib'r'l.
Then again, if the sciency gov'mint lib'r'ls are tryin' to wipe out the white race, it's even more foolish to suggest that racism is dead in this country.
____________________
Notes:
Stein, Rob. "Blacks less likely than whites to get NIH grants, study finds". The Washington Post. August 18, 2011.