# data[].attributes.body
In western civilization to be a known scientist you must be able to put the time and effort into it. You also must have a stable environment  to work. The facts are that people of colour tend to be lower income. Which leads to less stability. This leads to less ownership of property. This mean less money from property tax goes to the pubic education system(which is how a lot of public school get funded, by property  tax), this leads to a poor education. Which leads to less opportunities so of course there are going to be less people of colour in high science and other difficult fields.

# data[].attributes.body
All is focused on ethnic status in this nation and rarely anybody recognizes people for anything else but black and white. Separation has become awful. I accept that without ethnic prejudice, everyone should have the same number of options, but in the article I read how the lack of diversity can be deemed discriminatory. I totally agree that anyone in this country should be judged purely on their personalities and not on their racial status. Sadly, that is simply not the case. It explains how racial inequality occurs in science by analyzing the number of white scientists relative to colored scientists in the article "science has a race problem".

# data[].attributes.headline
Racial Diversity and Discrimination in the US STEM workforce (Morgan Collins)

# data[].attributes.subject
Racial Diversity and Discrimination in the US STEM workforce (Morgan Collins)

# data[].attributes.body
Below is a graph where it shows different ethnic groups and their relation to STEM fields. When looking at topics like "Not encouraged to pursue these subjects", or "Less like to think they would succeed in these fields" ethnic groups of blacks, and hispanics are at the tops of these lists. Although, when looking at people who are less interested in STEM fields than others, whites are at the top of this category. there are such wide gaps between ethnic groups, these categories/topics are the main reasons behind why there is this gap.
https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2018/01/09/women-and-men-in-stem-often-at-odds-over-workplace-equity/ps_2018-01-09_stem_4-05/

# data[].attributes.body
We live in a world and to be more on point we live in America a country where many apparently believe was once a great place. Who exactly was it great for? As stated in the original Padlet scientists are told to stay out of social issues and stick to science seems quite similar to when Lebron was instructed to shut up and dribble. We have failed to understand we are in a world where our opinions and innate human rights are no longer affected by job or social status let alone skin tone. They are not meant to be political but divine in nature due to our uniqueness in a sense we should live in a harmonic state. The article I will post below gives a detailed outline of the struggles faced by an Asian American after returning to his Lab. Where also an African American is told to keep his politics at home over  a BLM pin. When we think about the broad picture, the racism faced within STEM is not new nor is it its own form; it is simply the racism faced among the world since the beginning. We can look at this in terms of the Covid-19 outbreak as well it is not a genetic anomaly it is simply a common disease called racism which many people suffer from and it affects the lives of several minority groups.

https://www.sciencemag.org/careers/2020/07/racism-science-real-universities-must-champion-change

# data[].attributes.headline
The Subconscious Biases Within Us (Lindsey)

# data[].attributes.subject
The Subconscious Biases Within Us (Lindsey)

# data[].attributes.body
It is a particularly desirable trait to be able to put oneself into another's shoes and understand different perspectives. I had a particularly difficult conversation amongst some family members a few months ago and one member's denial of the existence of white privilege for themselves and others, because they simply just could not see it. I tried to explain to them that it definitely does exist, is a very real problem, and just because they weren't aware of it, the simple fact that they are a white middle class female allows them access to certain things and opportunities that other people may not have access to because they are not. Particularly in our education system in terms of accessibility to high quality education as well as positions, there is a definite and measurable imbalance presence between the races. In the article,  " Black Scientists Call Out Racism in Their Institutions", they recount students and their stories of systemic racism within the education system, of being reduced to just their race as a justification for their career/position and the  following imposter syndrome that results as racial trauma for black and brown students. As scientists we should understand the importance of having as much diverse people and perspectives in the work place as possible. Diverse perspectives produce good observation and good observation is good science.
https://www.theverge.com/21286924/science-racism-strike-stem-black-lives-matter-protests

# data[].attributes.body
Everybody in this country is based on racial standing and rarely anyone sees people for who they really are. Everyone sees color and color only, separation has gotten terrible. The article describes how scientist are being discriminated and people are saying there are more white scientists in the world. Why should it matter? They all went and got a degree and they all worked very hard to get to where they are at in the point of their lives.

# data[].attributes.body
I completely believe that everyone in this country should be based solely on their personality and not on their racial standings, unfortunately, that is just not the case.  In the article "science has a race problem" it describes how in science there is racial discrimination when examining the number of white scientist compared to colored scientist. However, I agree with what Kelly said about how there isn't exactly racism within the scientific field but more of a lack of diversity due to the number of colored people in the United States. Instead of focusing on if science contains racism we should be pushing the idea of higher education for the younger generation that will lead into higher level jobs in the scientific field. Thus, creating a more culturally diverse workplace.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree that everyone should have the same amount of opportunities without racial discriminations but in the article I read I don't understand how just the lack of diversity would be considered racist. The American populations is about 76% white and 13% black it makes sense that there would be a lack of diversity in many states. Its a shame that there is such a focus on race when instead we should be looking at the characteristics of a person. When it comes to education in college it shouldn't matter what your race is, but instead we should focus on the individuals work ethic, character, and intellectual behavior. If I were to run in a school I would want to make sure that everyone felt included, but also hire or accept any person based off of their experiences and scores.
https://www.cfact.org/2020/06/20/is-stem-inherently-racist/
https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/US/PST045219

# data[].attributes.headline
Exclusion of African Americans from Clinical Trails (Morgan Avrit)

# data[].attributes.subject
Exclusion of African Americans from Clinical Trails (Morgan Avrit)

# data[].attributes.body
Many barriers are found in those who are able to participate in clinical trials from age, sex, gender, and many other qualifications. Many factors go into the efficacy and safety of drugs including one's ethnic and racial backgrounds. The ACE-inhibitor for example had a less diverse clinical trail group and  the hypertension drug is found less effective in black patients. Black patients are underrepresented in many clinical trials even though as seen in many statistics they have the highest death rate for most diseases. Henrietta Lacks who is part of the Tuskegee Syphilis  Study are working on ethical research practices regarding many beneficial practices within Black Communities to be more inclusive in beneficial scientific work.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
HBR Staff/RobertoDavid/Getty Images/National Archives/Tuskegee Syphilis Study

Scientists often consider their work and their institutions unbiased. After all, scientists rely on a rigorous set of experiments to test hypotheses and arrive at conclusions that inform what the rest of us know to be facts in the world.

And yet history demonstrates how scientific practices have been used to justify systemic racism. Further, the exclusion of Black scientists from institutions, the failure to recognize contributions of Black scientists, and the lack of culturally relevant scientific curricula perpetuates the underrepresentation of Black people and their perspectives in science.

The racial/ethnic disparities in rates of infections and deaths from Covid-19 exposes these long-standing systemic injustices in scientific research, health care, and medicine. Biases are prevalent across all industries and institutions, including scientific ones. Unless scientists and scientific institutions change course - unless science recognizes how past racist scholarship continues to inform present research, and unless it directly addresses racism within its institutions - scientists will fail to ensure the health and well-being of large populations of people.

Connecting Past and Present Forms of Racism in Science

Although it is clear that past scientific research was rooted in overt racist beliefs, many scientists continue to overlook how they continue to build on these practices in our latest innovations in scientific industries.

For example, eugenics, now broadly condemned as form of pseudoscience, strived to improve the human race by the reproduction of individuals with desirable traits and sterilization of those with undesirable qualities. This philosophy, in part, gave rise to the idea of an Aryan race and the subsequent genocide of more than 6 million Jewish people. Yet despite its declining popularity, highly ranked scientific publications continue to publish works that reinforce notions of race-based differences in intelligence and aggression (later retracted). Further, the legacy of racist science is evident in the fact that individuals continue to hold beliefs that there are racial differences in a range of aspects including pain tolerance and sexual objectification.

The egregious violence used against Black people by police in the U.S. is paralleled in science, too. The Tuskegee Syphilis Study observed untreated syphilis in nearly 600 Black men for 40 years to develop a vaccine for the virus. The majority of the Black men were left untreated, creating hardships for multiple generations.

The idea that Black people's bodies are expendable is what led to the implementation of the Tuskegee Syphilis Study in the first place and has not escaped the minds of scientists today. For example, two French scientists casually suggested that experimentation to determine the effectiveness of a tuberculosis vaccine against Covid-19 should take place in Africa. According to one of the researchers:

"If I can be provocative, shouldn't we be doing this study in Africa, where there are no masks, no treatments, no resuscitation? A bit like as it is done elsewhere for some studies on AIDS. In prostitutes, we try things because we know that they are highly exposed and that they do not protect themselves."

Their casual suggestion to experiment with populations on the African continent demonstrates how Black people have and continue to be violated by scientific studies.

Although some Black people's biological tissues have created health care breakthroughs (i.e., Henrietta Lacks' HeLa cells), these discoveries have done little to advance the well-being and livelihood of Black people on a day-to-day basis. And while current teaching of the Tuskegee Syphylis Study and Henrietta Lacks focuses on the need for scientists to engage in ethical research practices regarding participants' consent, barriers to safe, consenting, and beneficial scientific practices within Black communities remain intact. Racism, therefore, has the potential to also exclude Black people from beneficial scientific work.

In particular, longstanding racist ideologies and practices undermine the significance of diversity for safe clinical trials. In addition to individuals' sex and gender, the efficacy and safety of drugs frequently depend on a patient's ethnic and racial background. ACE-inhibitors used to treat hypertension, for example, are less effective in Black patients compared to white patients, emphasizing the importance of ethnicity for developing therapeutics. Unfortunately, Black people continue to be underrepresented in clinical trials, despite their higher death rate from diseases such as cancer.

There are many barriers to minority participation in clinical trials, including a lack of information about and awareness of clinical trials, discomfort with the process, time and resource constraints, and mistrust of medical professionals in the Black community. There has been some progress: To counteract these barriers, Bristol Myers Squibb (where Dr. Ileka works) and other pharmaceutical companies have committed hundreds of millions of dollars to increasing participation in clinical trials from historically underserved communities. These efforts are extraordinarily important today: It is critical to include Black people in the Covid-19 vaccine clinical trials given that Black Americans are twice as likely to die and five times as likely to be hospitalized from the virus compared to white people. Restoring trust and humanizing Black people's inclusion in clinical trials are necessary to ensure the large-scale effectiveness of any vaccine.

Examining Systemic Racism in Scientific Institutions

Establishing a deep knowledge of science's racist history - and how it informs present-day scientific practices - is the first step to making effective and sustainable changes. The next is to question how this history and these practices have informed the institutions, like schools and scientific journals, that perpetuate harm and marginalization of Black people. The aforementioned examples are not isolated instances of "unethical" scientific practices, but symptoms of a larger issue within the scientific community that fails to recognize Black people as human and as contributors to scientific advancement.

Just recently, for example, a well-known chemist published an essay on factors that influence how the field of organic synthesis continues to develop. In it, he argued that efforts to promote diversity have prioritized inclusion of certain groups of people at the expense of meritocracy, leading to a detriment of innovation in the field. More troubling is the fact that this essay was published in Angewandte Chemie, International Edition, a high-profile chemistry journal. To many, the essay undermined the years of effort geared towards diversifying the chemistry community. To others, particularly those who have been historically marginalized in chemistry, the essay was yet another reminder of the never-ending fight to be included into the scientific community.

The journal quickly removed the essay and began an investigation of how it passed the peer review process, as have others in psychology, economics, and other fields. In a strong statement of solidarity, 16 members of Angewandte Chemie's editorial board (including Nobel Laureates and other top researchers in the field) stepped down. Since its publication, several scholars have responded to reinforce the value of diversity and inclusion in the sciences.

Even so, biases like these held by scientists make it difficult to recruit and retain Black scientists. These biases begin in K-12 education, and these experiences, coupled with ineffective mentorship and a lack of visible Black scientists as role models, pose additional challenges to inspire future Black scientists to join the field.

Higher education, too, is brimming with exclusionary practices that further discourage Black students from pursuing STEM degrees. Intro level " weed out" courses only promote a select few "talented" students at the expense of cultivating a safe environment for students to learn and grow. Once Black students enter graduate-level programs, they are often the only one, compounding experiences of tokenism and isolation in a demanding field.

Dismantling Systemic Racism in Scientific Institutions

Although there are many challenges that must be addressed, there are some basic strategies that those in powerful positions can do to increase the equity and inclusion of Black scientists. And like any organization, scientific institutions must take intentional, strategic action to advance racial equity in their communities and practice. We identify several ways that individuals in different roles throughout scientific organizations can dismantle racism.

Lab Directors, Editors, and Principal Investigators. Similar to leaders of any organization, lab directors, journal editors, and principal investigators (PIs) have the power to shape the culture, conversations, and research practices. They can begin with their own research tools (e.g., the scientific method) to arrive at their solution for dismantling systemic racism.

First, acknowledge the problems. To start, there are too few Black scientists in the STEM field relative to their population in the world, and they are having qualitatively different experiences than members of other racial groups. There is also an overrepresentation of white scientists publishing research on race in top journals and teaching in general science classrooms. This teaching, beginning in science classes from K-12 and continuing through higher education, are generally taught from the lens of a white instructor with curriculum based on mostly white/European scientific contributions. Limiting the production of and the dissemination of knowledge from a white majority narrows our scope of scientific discovery and may not engage all students.

Second, interrogate why these problems exist. Beyond the "pipeline" argument, other reasons include deeply held biases of incompetence that may prohibit leaders from selecting Black scientists to join their labs and publish papers, or perceiving that Black researchers are only interested in diversity issues as opposed to scientific work. These presumptions can lead to discounting the work of Black scientists and stall their career progression.

Third, develop robust experiments to test and design solutions to these problems. We offer a few ideas below:

Encourage and initiate specific conversations about race as it pertains to your organization beyond unconscious bias training. This requires that leaders first learn and know how race and racism is present in their everyday work.

Once leaders are aware of their biases, they can create guidelines aimed at the inclusion of Black scientists. For editors, this may include diversifying their reviewers, having clear standards for publication, and editors addressing racism in scientific research.

PIs can confront their own racial biases by placing Black scientists on challenging assignments. To ensure that the assignments are challenging and not designed to weed them out, lab directors can provide ample resources, create and normalize failure as part of the process, and provide feedback that facilitates growth and development.

Incorporate diversity into science curricula including culturally relevant pedagogy and highlighting the contributions of Black scientists.

Partner with Black scientists on research and diversity work. Rather than assuming that Black scientists are less interested in the scientific work, you can shoulder the responsibility of calling attention to everyday racism, systemic inequities, and ongoing racial violence that affects Black people. Vocally advocating for Black workers in their absence and creating opportunities to develop resources are clear forms of partnerships that PIs can take.

Support the various motivations that draw Black students into science fields, such as the desire to be role models for the next generation, by encouraging participation in outreach programs while pursuing advanced degrees.

Finally, evaluate the "successes" of these experiments to determine next steps as an organization. Unlike traditional experiments, the results of building a racially inclusive environment may appear more ambiguous than a numeric result. Some starter questions include: Am I creating room for Black scientists in each phase of the research process? Are Black scientists being heard and taken seriously in this institution? How can we make sustainable changes that leads to equitable treatment and inclusion of Black scientists?

Devoting more attention and support to Black people who are doing the science will generate a more inclusive environment and likely facilitate more discoveries.

Recruiters and Hiring Managers. Black people are severely underrepresented in STEM. The lack of Black scientists is often attributed to the "leaky pipeline," but relying on inequitable and unjust systems to generate a diverse workforce will continuously reproduce underrepresentation of Black scientists. Merely focusing on recruiting talented Black scientists at the end of their undergraduate programs will perpetuate their underrepresentation in STEM. Black students are less likely to have access to rigorous STEM education, creating a chasm between them and their white peers at the collegiate level.

Instead, scientific institutions could collaborate with organizations designed to build a larger pipeline into STEM and to offer community for its workers, such as The National Organization for the Advancement of Black Chemists and Chemical Engineers (NOBCChE, where both Dr. Ileka and Dr. Robinson serve in leadership capacities) or The National Society of Black Engineers (NSBE).

Companies can also change the requirements necessary to work in their industries that bar individuals from securing jobs. Several tech companies no longer require college degrees for entry-level roles. These systemic changes have the potential to drastically change the demographic composition of scientists in STEM fields.

Importantly, the specific funneling of resources to hire and recruit Black scientists is vital for the effectiveness of recruiters. Vague goals to "diversify" STEM have not moved the needle on Black, Latinx, and indigenous representation. Why? One explanation may be that members of dominant groups perceive an organization to be diverse at lower levels than members of marginalized groups; that is, the diversity threshold is much lower from the perspective of White men in any given field. The subjectivity of diversity requires scientific institutions to set measurable goals for diversity. Developing active recruitment strategies - such as developing partnerships with historically Black colleges and universities, and attending and sponsoring Black and other minority-focused professional development organizations - are crucial to achieving change.

Non-Black Scientists. Scientists at every level of an organization have a role to play in advancing Black scientists. First, they must listen to and learn from Black scientists. This is starting to happen; for example, a multi-identity, intersectional coalition recently spearheaded the viral #ShutDownSTEM to stop business as usual and engage non-Black scientists in eradicating anti-Black racism. Dr. Shardé Davis and Dr. Joy Melody Woods also launched #BlackInTheIvory to spotlight the discrimination Black people experience in academia. Reading and listening to the experiences of Black scientists will help to recognize and remedy their disparate experiences in scientific institutions.

Second, non-Black scientists can become vocal allies for Black scientists' representation and treatment in organizations. Similar to calls for white feminists to have intersectional movements, white and non-Black scientists can bring attention to the dismal numbers of Black scientists in their organizations instead of solely focusing on their own groups' representation in senior leadership roles. Turning their attention to processes and structures that perpetuate the underrepresentation of Black employees may also inform why white women and Asian-identified persons encounter a glass/bamboo ceiling in STEM professions (e.g., presumed incompetence). Collective action is a powerful tool to enact change, as evidenced by the actions of editorial board members for the Angewandte Chemie journal. Employee resource groups and affinity groups are a great place to build alliances to dismantle structures that marginalize Black scientists.

Third, scientists must continually evaluate the dehumanizing components of their work. Although it is important to have diverse samples for clinical trials, it is equally important to not consider Black people as disposable test subjects in the development of vaccines and scientific advancement. Building trust with Black communities by partnering with community-based organizations can increase accountability and responsibility of scientific research. Taking a balanced, racially equitable view of research can help scientists shape a research agenda that includes Black people as well-informed participants as well as investigators.

In addition to the rigors of scientific experimentation, scientist at all levels must do additional work to ensure that their science does not perpetuate racism of any kind. As scientific innovations continue to grow at an exponential rate, following these recommendations will help foster a world where everyone can benefit from groundbreaking scientific advancement.
Correction: An earlier version of this article incorrectly stated that some control patients were purposefully infected as part of the Tuskegee Syphilis Study. The article has been updated and we regret the error.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Scientists often consider their work and their institutions unbiased. After all, scientists rely on a rigorous set of experiments to test hypotheses and arrive at conclusions that inform what the rest of us know to be facts in the world. And yet history demonstrates how scientific practices have been used to justify systemic racism.

# data[].attributes.body
Racial inequality in STEM is a known side of the systematic racism in the US that not only minorities social and cultural lives, but their jobs and interests as well. Through research on this topic, I have found that racism in STEM starts before higher education even starts, in middle and high school. Proof is given in an article cited that minorities are pushed out of stem through class and social background not supporting such a background, which can all be attributed to systematic racism and white privilege. Black students especially are pushed out, and have much higher numbers of either switching degrees or dropping out while in this area of study. This affects overall success of STEM because through effects
mentioned earlier, the world is robbed of possibly ground breaking research and science. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.3102/0013189X19831006

# data[].attributes.headline
Racism/Sexism experienced in by top female researcher of color in STEM (Anna)

# data[].attributes.subject
Racism/Sexism experienced in by top female researcher of color in STEM (Anna)

# data[].attributes.body
"A prolific tweeter with nearly 80,000 followers, Iwasaki shares frustrations about mansplaining, gender discrimination, and the extra work that women, especially women of color, endure in dealing with messages that question their expertise and position. “I’m exhausted from having to do this, which takes time away from my real work,” she tweeted."
https://www.statnews.com/2020/10/27/akiko-iwasaki-profile-covid19-research-fighting-sexism-power-imbalances-science/

# data[].attributes.body
Covid-19 hits non-white people more often with more severe outcomes

Below is a table that shows health outcomes for various ethnicities for Covid-19. The brief introduction gives a few reasons, but one that isn't mentioned is that people of color a vastly underrepresented in drug trials including Covid-19 drug trials.
https://www.news-medical.net/news/20200811/People-of-color-minority-groups-are-underrepresented-in-COVID-19-clinical-trials.aspx

# data[].attributes.body
Aside from the pandemic, racism is the other BIG topic of 2020. Often scientists try to stay out of politics and social issues as exemplified by this quote: "Don't politicize STEM. Stick to Science, not social issues." However,  scientific findings often have direct impacts on health and safety of human beings and that makes science inherently political as well. This doesn't mean scientists should become less rigorous, but rather that scientists need to become more aware of the sometimes enormous consequences of racism in STEM.
For this assignment, I want you to find and document how racism can be detrimental and even unethical to both science and the society it serves OR how racial diversity in science can be be beneficial to the society it serves.
You can focus either on a scientific issue in biology or on a scientists in a biology-related field that is non-white  For guidance, take a look at the two examples I am providing you.

# data[].attributes.body
The topic of racism in the medical field and more specifically pharmacology is something I feel personally connected to. I am a pre-med major, and any example of racism in the medical field is one that I will face or cower from. Pharmacology has a long history of both intentional and unintentional racism. On the side of intentional the most well known would be the Tuskegee Study. A study which was conducted by the federal government which included 600 Black men, the stated purpose of which was to study the affects of syphilis. The underline case was the manipulation of the ill-informed and the and unfortunate. The study provided it test subjects with medical check ups and burial insurance, in exchange they would track their “recovery” and “treatment.” The leaders of the study purposefully mislead and lied to there subject by not using proper and new methods to treat them. In most cases allowing the disease to take its full course. All in the name of what would become useless research. When did this occur you might ask, it was running up until 1972. Deserved reparations are still being paid out.

Another example this time of unintentional bias is the make up of medical trails. There have been many explanations given that we can get into, but one thing agreed upon by scientist is that it exist. African Americans are underrepresented in medical drug trials.  This having a widespread affect most notably in the way certain drugs affect African Americans, leading to poor health care outcomes. This is an example of unintentional racism that has just as negative of an affect as intentional racism. Some of the proposed causes of this are that there is a compounded distrust for the medical industry by African Americans. Other reasons given are the fact that most drug companies do trials in non-low-income areas where People of Color are underrepresented.

# data[].attributes.body
PEERS = Persons excluded because of their race and ethnicity

On the graph below you can see that although white students and students of non-white ethnicity enter college intending to study in a STEM field at the same rate but do not graduate or persist at the same rate. This has not changed significantly between 1992 and 2018 and is an indication that there are systemic forces at work that slowly but surly exclude non-white students in STEM by graduation.