Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NYPost)   Pulse oximeters might be racist   (nypost.com) divider line
    More: Interesting, Oxygen saturation, Pulse oximeters, oxygen saturation of the blood, dark skin pigmentation, oxygen levels, Pulse oximeter, Medicine, Human skin color  
•       •       •

4148 clicks; posted to Main » on 24 Feb 2021 at 4:05 PM (6 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



135 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2021-02-24 2:56:07 PM  
The self-applied finger style, or the knee-mounted neck ones that cops prefer to use?
 
2021-02-24 3:33:58 PM  
I submitted this four days ago with the exact same headline.

https://www.fark.com/comments/1119442​3​/Pulse-oximeters-might-be-racist#new

Great job, everyone.
 
2021-02-24 3:44:22 PM  
"Racial disparities in health care stem from a wide variety of factors, and it is particularly disturbing that racism may be embedded in key clinical tools," the pols added.

No.  Just stop.  Light is not racist.  This is currently a technical limitation of the tool.
 
2021-02-24 4:07:00 PM  

skatedrifter: I submitted this four days ago with the exact same headline.

https://www.fark.com/comments/11194423​/Pulse-oximeters-might-be-racist#new

Great job, everyone.


You tried.  Better luck next time, champ!
 
2021-02-24 4:08:10 PM  

skatedrifter: I submitted this four days ago with the exact same headline.

https://www.fark.com/comments/11194423​/Pulse-oximeters-might-be-racist#new

Great job, everyone.


The modmins take awhile to sober up.
 
2021-02-24 4:08:28 PM  

skatedrifter: I submitted this four days ago with the exact same headline.

https://www.fark.com/comments/11194423​/Pulse-oximeters-might-be-racist#new

Great job, everyone.


I gave up submitting in 2010
 
2021-02-24 4:08:29 PM  
Fark user imageView Full Size


I blame Veridian Dynamics
 
2021-02-24 4:09:03 PM  
Isn't that what FDA testing and approval is supposed to determine?

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-02-24 4:09:28 PM  

vrax: "Racial disparities in health care stem from a wide variety of factors, and it is particularly disturbing that racism may be embedded in key clinical tools," the pols added.

No.  Just stop.  Light is not racist.  This is currently a technical limitation of the tool.


If it's a design defect because during R&D they only tested on white people, it can be considered racist.
 
2021-02-24 4:09:48 PM  

vrax: "Racial disparities in health care stem from a wide variety of factors, and it is particularly disturbing that racism may be embedded in key clinical tools," the pols added.

No.  Just stop.  Light is not racist.  This is currently a technical limitation of the tool.


If you sell a device that's supposed to measure blood oxygen then it had better work on normal people. If you somehow tested it only on white people then you deserve to get the shiat sued out of you. The technology may work just fine in theory, but putting it into practice has obvious pitfalls that need to be addressed before widescale deployment.
 
2021-02-24 4:11:31 PM  

vrax: "Racial disparities in health care stem from a wide variety of factors, and it is particularly disturbing that racism may be embedded in key clinical tools," the pols added.

No.  Just stop.  Light is not racist.  This is currently a technical limitation of the tool.


FTA, they have never been calibrated for darker skin pigments. That's the racist part.
 
2021-02-24 4:12:02 PM  
Nintendo could have told you that a decade ago. These went unreleased because they didn't work on 10% of people.
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-02-24 4:12:44 PM  

skatedrifter: I submitted this four days ago with the exact same headline.

https://www.fark.com/comments/11194423​/Pulse-oximeters-might-be-racist#new

Great job, everyone.


Uh, exact? yours does not have the dash between pulse and oximeter.
 
2021-02-24 4:12:50 PM  
Simple answer: Finger bleach. Or dermabrasion.
 
2021-02-24 4:14:11 PM  
Well just get a bunch of brownish people and only brownish people to submit to painful arterial blood gases while wearing a pulse ox to calibrate them. This shouldn't be a problem at all!
 
2021-02-24 4:15:06 PM  
Aren't the pads of their fingers somewhat lighter then the rest of their skin?

So you can be Deep Tobacco on the swatch and your finger pads are more of a Carmel Cappuccino.
 
2021-02-24 4:16:44 PM  
If they were invented by a PoC, they aren't.
If it was a white, of course they are.
 
2021-02-24 4:17:04 PM  
Fark user imageView Full Size

I think the display they use on the Black model is particularly insensitive.
 
2021-02-24 4:17:27 PM  

maxandgrinch: skatedrifter: I submitted this four days ago with the exact same headline.

https://www.fark.com/comments/11194423​/Pulse-oximeters-might-be-racist#new

Great job, everyone.

Uh, exact? yours does not have the dash between pulse and oximeter.


Wait..... let me clean my latest sneeze from my phone..... nevermind.
 
2021-02-24 4:18:53 PM  
I knew it!

I suspected as soon as the one I bought arrived and it had a little swastika on the top!

And now I realise that the ghosts pictured on the top weren't ghosts at all!

Also, lol, devices aren't racist. And laziness isn't racist either.

If I designed a light based product product (camera such as facial recognition, or a pulse oximeter), tested it on myself and my family and it's worked 100% of the time. It probably doesn't work on black people.  Not because they're inferior (racism), but because my tests succeeded 100% of the time and thus I didn't foresee scenarios where it could fail.

The same thing would likely happen if the product was designed by a black family, just the other way around.
 
2021-02-24 4:20:08 PM  

mrparks: Aren't the pads of their fingers somewhat lighter then the rest of their skin?

So you can be Deep Tobacco on the swatch and your finger pads are more of a Carmel Cappuccino.


Not always.
 
2021-02-24 4:21:00 PM  

vrax: "Racial disparities in health care stem from a wide variety of factors, and it is particularly disturbing that racism may be embedded in key clinical tools," the pols added.

No.  Just stop.  Light is not racist.  This is currently a technical limitation of the tool.


Exactly. Bullshiat like that statement definitely needs to be called out. Subby's headline was a joke, but whoever made that statement was serous.
 
2021-02-24 4:22:11 PM  

dothemath: [Fark user image 214x236]
I think the display they use on the Black model is particularly insensitive.


At least its easier to read than the one for chinese people. They have to keep cracking open cookies to get their readings.
 
2021-02-24 4:25:31 PM  

Trik: If they were invented by a PoC, they aren't.
If it was a white, of course they are.


Name one PoC invention that has excluded white people. And before you begin, be aware that cocoa butter works just as well on your elbows, too.
 
2021-02-24 4:25:43 PM  

LineNoise: dothemath: [Fark user image 214x236]
I think the display they use on the Black model is particularly insensitive.

At least its easier to read than the one for chinese people. They have to keep cracking open cookies to get their readings.


Theres no place for jokes like this.

Not here.
Not now.
 
2021-02-24 4:27:10 PM  

Malenfant: vrax: "Racial disparities in health care stem from a wide variety of factors, and it is particularly disturbing that racism may be embedded in key clinical tools," the pols added.

No.  Just stop.  Light is not racist.  This is currently a technical limitation of the tool.

If it's a design defect because during R&D they only tested on white people, it can be considered racist.


That is a methodological flaw, not racism, unless, of course, the new claim is that the testers deliberately failed to include test subjects of certain genetic backgrounds solely for the diabolical purpose of rendering the tool less accurate or effective on certain ethnicities.

Is that the claim now? I mean, we know that white nationalists have been deliberately infiltrating law enforcement agencies, but even I didn't think they'd gone so far so to compromise the R&D and QA departments of medical equipment manufacturers. That's kinda far-thinking for that lot, yeah?
 
2021-02-24 4:27:42 PM  
NYP;DR
 
2021-02-24 4:29:56 PM  

Swordblade: Nintendo could have told you that a decade ago. These went unreleased because they didn't work on 10% of people.
[Fark user image 425x223]


I'd never seen that failed accessory. You never know what you're going to learn about on fark.
 
2021-02-24 4:30:06 PM  

UltimaCS: Trik: If they were invented by a PoC, they aren't.
If it was a white, of course they are.

Name one PoC invention that has excluded white people. And before you begin, be aware that cocoa butter works just as well on your elbows, too.


An impossible task.

I could only name like two inventions where I know the colour of the skin of the inventor. And I certainly couldn't name a single light based apparatus where I could name the inventor, or the colour of their skin.

Who invented the first camera? fark knows.

Who invented the pulse oximeter? fark knows.

Who invented...I don't know...the laser? fark knows.
 
2021-02-24 4:30:06 PM  

vrax: "Racial disparities in health care stem from a wide variety of factors, and it is particularly disturbing that racism may be embedded in key clinical tools," the pols added.

No.  Just stop.  Light is not racist.  This is currently a technical limitation of the tool.


I dunno. They are made by KKK Medical Supplies.
 
2021-02-24 4:31:10 PM  

aagrajag: Malenfant: vrax: "Racial disparities in health care stem from a wide variety of factors, and it is particularly disturbing that racism may be embedded in key clinical tools," the pols added.

No.  Just stop.  Light is not racist.  This is currently a technical limitation of the tool.

If it's a design defect because during R&D they only tested on white people, it can be considered racist.

That is a methodological flaw, not racism, unless, of course, the new claim is that the testers deliberately failed to include test subjects of certain genetic backgrounds solely for the diabolical purpose of rendering the tool less accurate or effective on certain ethnicities.

Is that the claim now? I mean, we know that white nationalists have been deliberately infiltrating law enforcement agencies, but even I didn't think they'd gone so far so to compromise the R&D and QA departments of medical equipment manufacturers. That's kinda far-thinking for that lot, yeah?


You don't have to be diabolical to make racist equipment. You just need to fail to include people of various races in your testing.
 
2021-02-24 4:31:51 PM  
The one pictured sucks for everyone. We use adhesive pleths for people being critically monitored. Earlobe, toe, finger, forehead - whatever it takes. I have never once said, "well, this doesn't work on this dude, but he's black - sucks to be black. Oh well". Well, now I have- dammit, Fark.
 
2021-02-24 4:34:03 PM  

UltimaCS: Name one PoC invention that has excluded white people. And before you begin, be aware that cocoa butter works just as well on your elbows, too.


The device doesn't exclude black people. Its basic function is impacted by skin tone, and people need to be aware of that. Even if you had a farking color swath and a dial on it to recalibrate it, you aren't going to nail everyones skin tone. The advisory is just to make sure people are aware of that, as i'm sure most healthcare professionals already were, and because lay people are using them now because they are inexpensive and convenient.

I've got to imagine your average anesthesiologist knows this. Nobody set out to make these things with the intent of screwing over people of color, and i'd imagine would be quite happy if they worked with the same degree of accuracy as someone of fair skin. But then they wouldn't have ultimately built the same device.

There are obviously better ways of getting more accurate readings that work across skin colors, but they aren't as quick\easy\cheap as these things. They are a simple diagnostic, not a gold standard, and the intent here is making sure that people keep that in mind
 
2021-02-24 4:35:22 PM  

Malenfant: aagrajag: Malenfant: vrax: "Racial disparities in health care stem from a wide variety of factors, and it is particularly disturbing that racism may be embedded in key clinical tools," the pols added.

No.  Just stop.  Light is not racist.  This is currently a technical limitation of the tool.

If it's a design defect because during R&D they only tested on white people, it can be considered racist.

That is a methodological flaw, not racism, unless, of course, the new claim is that the testers deliberately failed to include test subjects of certain genetic backgrounds solely for the diabolical purpose of rendering the tool less accurate or effective on certain ethnicities.

Is that the claim now? I mean, we know that white nationalists have been deliberately infiltrating law enforcement agencies, but even I didn't think they'd gone so far so to compromise the R&D and QA departments of medical equipment manufacturers. That's kinda far-thinking for that lot, yeah?

You don't have to be diabolical to make racist equipment. You just need to fail to include people of various races in your testing.


Lol, IF you live in a multicultural society and IF you work for a large multinational corporation with money to spend on testing, then that could be true.

But many inventions are people in their basement with limited funds, so you test your product against the largest market.

What if you live in a country that's realistically one colour and you only really intended to sell it within your country?

Say, you live in Ethiopia.

Is it racist that you didn't test it on any white people?
 
2021-02-24 4:36:23 PM  

UltimaCS: Name one PoC invention that has excluded white people. And before you begin, be aware that cocoa butter works just as well on your elbows, too.


I believe Chick Hearn was credited with bringing a slam dunk to prominence.

I just watched a Woody Harrelson documentary about its impact on a white guy.
 
2021-02-24 4:37:18 PM  

skatedrifter: I submitted this four days ago with the exact same headline.

https://www.fark.com/comments/11194423​/Pulse-oximeters-might-be-racist#new

Great job, everyone.


If your link had been to wapo or one of the other type of links I'm no longer allowed to mention, I bet they would have greened it.
 
2021-02-24 4:39:21 PM  

LineNoise: UltimaCS: Name one PoC invention that has excluded white people. And before you begin, be aware that cocoa butter works just as well on your elbows, too.

The device doesn't exclude black people. Its basic function is impacted by skin tone, and people need to be aware of that. Even if you had a farking color swath and a dial on it to recalibrate it, you aren't going to nail everyones skin tone. The advisory is just to make sure people are aware of that, as i'm sure most healthcare professionals already were, and because lay people are using them now because they are inexpensive and convenient.

I've got to imagine your average anesthesiologist knows this. Nobody set out to make these things with the intent of screwing over people of color, and i'd imagine would be quite happy if they worked with the same degree of accuracy as someone of fair skin. But then they wouldn't have ultimately built the same device.

There are obviously better ways of getting more accurate readings that work across skin colors, but they aren't as quick\easy\cheap as these things. They are a simple diagnostic, not a gold standard, and the intent here is making sure that people keep that in mind


Fark user imageView Full Size


Soon to be available through McKesson Medical catalog.
 
2021-02-24 4:40:33 PM  

Malenfant: aagrajag: Malenfant: vrax: "Racial disparities in health care stem from a wide variety of factors, and it is particularly disturbing that racism may be embedded in key clinical tools," the pols added.

No.  Just stop.  Light is not racist.  This is currently a technical limitation of the tool.

If it's a design defect because during R&D they only tested on white people, it can be considered racist.

That is a methodological flaw, not racism, unless, of course, the new claim is that the testers deliberately failed to include test subjects of certain genetic backgrounds solely for the diabolical purpose of rendering the tool less accurate or effective on certain ethnicities.

Is that the claim now? I mean, we know that white nationalists have been deliberately infiltrating law enforcement agencies, but even I didn't think they'd gone so far so to compromise the R&D and QA departments of medical equipment manufacturers. That's kinda far-thinking for that lot, yeah?

You don't have to be diabolical to make racist equipment. You just need to fail to include people of various races in your testing.


The term "racism" implies will, or intent, or design. If none of those are present, the term does not apply.

White people are more vulnerable to malarial infection, while black people are more vulnerable to sickle-cell anemia. If we were to apply your bizarrely-extended definition of "racism" here, our physical bodies themselves would be classified as "racist".
 
2021-02-24 4:40:39 PM  

Russ1642: vrax: "Racial disparities in health care stem from a wide variety of factors, and it is particularly disturbing that racism may be embedded in key clinical tools," the pols added.

No.  Just stop.  Light is not racist.  This is currently a technical limitation of the tool.

If you sell a device that's supposed to measure blood oxygen then it had better work on normal people. If you somehow tested it only on white people then you deserve to get the shiat sued out of you. The technology may work just fine in theory, but putting it into practice has obvious pitfalls that need to be addressed before widescale deployment.


That and if they're only doing research on white people (often, white males) whatever results and standardization is geared towards that demographic. This can lead to difficulty with patient care, because people are different and present differently. Even anatomy can have slight variations among sexes and ethnicities, and should be accounted for.
 
2021-02-24 4:41:15 PM  
Malenfant:
You don't have to be diabolical to make racist equipment. You just need to fail to include people of various races in your testing.

Hey, we have a great, inexpensive, simple to use diagnostic tool. It doesn't work perfectly for people with dark skin tones or when people have nail polish on, so you need to consider that when you use it. But you can't use it, because it doesn't work perfectly for everyone.
 
2021-02-24 4:41:58 PM  

dyhchong: Malenfant: aagrajag: Malenfant: vrax: "Racial disparities in health care stem from a wide variety of factors, and it is particularly disturbing that racism may be embedded in key clinical tools," the pols added.

No.  Just stop.  Light is not racist.  This is currently a technical limitation of the tool.

If it's a design defect because during R&D they only tested on white people, it can be considered racist.

That is a methodological flaw, not racism, unless, of course, the new claim is that the testers deliberately failed to include test subjects of certain genetic backgrounds solely for the diabolical purpose of rendering the tool less accurate or effective on certain ethnicities.

Is that the claim now? I mean, we know that white nationalists have been deliberately infiltrating law enforcement agencies, but even I didn't think they'd gone so far so to compromise the R&D and QA departments of medical equipment manufacturers. That's kinda far-thinking for that lot, yeah?

You don't have to be diabolical to make racist equipment. You just need to fail to include people of various races in your testing.

Lol, IF you live in a multicultural society and IF you work for a large multinational corporation with money to spend on testing, then that could be true.

But many inventions are people in their basement with limited funds, so you test your product against the largest market.

What if you live in a country that's realistically one colour and you only really intended to sell it within your country?

Say, you live in Ethiopia.

Is it racist that you didn't test it on any white people?


That's total nonsense. It may start out that way, but once you decide to sell A HEALTHCARE PRODUCT in a different market, you're responsible for making sure it works on your intended target market.

BTW this also happens to white people with tattoos.
 
2021-02-24 4:42:03 PM  

Russ1642: vrax: "Racial disparities in health care stem from a wide variety of factors, and it is particularly disturbing that racism may be embedded in key clinical tools," the pols added.

No.  Just stop.  Light is not racist.  This is currently a technical limitation of the tool.

If you sell a device that's supposed to measure blood oxygen then it had better work on normal people. If you somehow tested it only on white people then you deserve to get the shiat sued out of you. The technology may work just fine in theory, but putting it into practice has obvious pitfalls that need to be addressed before widescale deployment.


Sickle cell anemia is racist according to you because treatments for it are primarily focused with working on black people.

It's very simple really, if X tool works better with X situation and Y tool works better with Y situation, we keep them both in our toolshed. It's just a matter of finding Y tool for PoC. It's not racist, it's a fact of life that people are different. Sorry to break your fantasy.
 
2021-02-24 4:42:05 PM  

Malenfant: vrax: "Racial disparities in health care stem from a wide variety of factors, and it is particularly disturbing that racism may be embedded in key clinical tools," the pols added.

No.  Just stop.  Light is not racist.  This is currently a technical limitation of the tool.

If it's a design defect because during R&D they only tested on white people, it can be considered racist.


What if the technique only works reliably on white people? Should the devices not be used at all?
 
2021-02-24 4:42:16 PM  

UltimaCS: Trik: If they were invented by a PoC, they aren't.
If it was a white, of course they are.

Name one PoC invention that has excluded white people. And before you begin, be aware that cocoa butter works just as well on your elbows, too.


Funk music.
 
2021-02-24 4:44:27 PM  

Troy Aikman's Giant Thumbs: Funk music.


White people playing funk is the most embarrassing thing I can think of.

Oh and blues, too.
 
2021-02-24 4:45:15 PM  
"We invited black people to our remote test center in Tuskegee, but surprisingly, none of them showed up..."
 
2021-02-24 4:48:47 PM  

vrax: "Racial disparities in health care stem from a wide variety of factors, and it is particularly disturbing that racism may be embedded in key clinical tools," the pols added.

No.  Just stop.  Light is not racist.  This is currently a technical limitation of the tool.


Light is not racist but man should you hear how magnetic flux talks about the Rom after a beer or two.    Holly shiatballs.
 
2021-02-24 4:50:33 PM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-02-24 4:53:30 PM  

slantsix: That's total nonsense. It may start out that way, but once you decide to sell A HEALTHCARE PRODUCT in a different market, you're responsible for making sure it works on your intended target market.

BTW this also happens to white people with tattoos.


Exactly, you just proved the point. Not accounting for another race in testing doesn't mean the product is racist. The same as the product isn't tattooist. The inventor didn't sit down and think, "fark those guys with tattoos, we're not going to test it against them."

However if you have an intended market for a product, and you don't test it against them, then there COULD be racism in that, but it's also a question of foresight and intent.

If I'm the Ethiopian device manufacturer, and my devices are 100% effective back home, and the country I want to sell them in doesn't require I retest them all against a swatch of skin tones, then there's no reason for me to inherently believe that they won't just work.

At no point did I think, 'fark white people, they can just die" which is racism. I just didn't consider it might not work. Same as I didn't foresee it not working with people with tattoos. Or foresee it not working with a kid whose friends drew all over his arms with vivid.

Again, laziness isn't racism. There has to be an element of believed superiority.

I, for one, did not in any way, shape or form, consider that it wouldn't work with people with tattoos, and it's not because I hate people with tattoos.
 
2021-02-24 4:56:48 PM  
Now, if they were notified it didn't work, and at that point they were like, "fark em, we're not going to revise the design." there's your racism.

This should simply be an article that says, "These devices don't work on black people very well, they need to be redesigned. Also, our government should require that medical products with light sensors should be tested against a government provided swatch of skin tones"

And then reporting how they told the manufacturer about it, and the manufacturer's response.
 
Displayed 50 of 135 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter



  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.