Ep. 139 Diversity in Cardiology, with Martha Gulati
A recent article authored by Dr. Norman Wang on the history and current state of affirmative action programs in medical schools and cardiology departments has led to a storm of controversy and to Dr. Wang’s demotion as fellowship program director. To discuss that article and the controversies we are joined by Dr. Martha Gulati, division Chief of Cardiology at the University of Arizona. She is also the best-selling author of Saving Women’s Hearts and editor-in-chief of ACC’s CardioSmart.
LINKS:
The now retracted Wang paper: https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1161/JAHA.120.015959
Journal of the AHA comment on retraction: https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/JAHA.119.014592
Regents of Univ. of California v. Bakke, SCOTUS decision: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/438/265/
GUEST:
Martha Gulati: Twitter and Website
WATCH ON YOUTUBE:
Watch the episode on our YouTube channel
SUPPORT THE SHOW:
Make a small donation on our Patreon page on and join our discussion group or receive a free book.
Why are different outcomes across different ethnic groups a ‘problem’ for Martha?
The assumption that there must be population-representative ratios of say, left handed to right handed people in rhinoplasty or forestry is preposterous.
Will she demand ‘equality’ for hair color representation as well?
There’s a perfectly logical and scientific explanation for underrepresentation of blacks in academic fields, and it lies in the distribution of intelligence.
I don’t believe race is of the same biological formality as right-handedness or hair color.
The diversity advocacy seems to me more religion than science. Viewpoints outside of the orthodoxy are not tolerated.
The proponents claim for special benefit from a diverse society seems based on weak evidence. Are the Japanese or the Swedes at a disadvantage because their society is more homogeneous than ours?
Anish proposed to Dr. Gulati a contradiction in her argument which I believe she was unable to answer. On the one hand she claims better medical results for patients who have doctors who “look like them”. On the other hand she denies that she intends that the diverse doctors she wishes to produce will be earmarked for specific groups of patients. It’s all foolishness. Competency and humanity are the reasons that I think most people choose their doctors, not race or ethnicity. Obviously language compatibility is a strong consideration. I will choose a competent doctor of minority background any day over a “white” doctor who is incompetent.