『Oncology Unscripted With John Marshall: Episode 14: The Gender Gap in Genius: Why Credit Still Isn’t Equal』のカバーアート

Oncology Unscripted With John Marshall: Episode 14: The Gender Gap in Genius: Why Credit Still Isn’t Equal

Oncology Unscripted With John Marshall: Episode 14: The Gender Gap in Genius: Why Credit Still Isn’t Equal

無料で聴く

ポッドキャストの詳細を見る

このコンテンツについて

 Published, Performed, Passed Over—Because Science Still Has a Gender Problem[00:00:05]John Marshall, MD: John Marshall, Oncology Unscripted. It's unscripted because you can't make this stuff up. I don't know if your week or the last two has been anything like mine, but our country and our science and healthcare, and all of that stuff, is really undergoing an incredible number of changes so quickly that we can't even catch up with what the impact will be. And maybe It's only because we're in health care, but I gotta believe that the impact that all of these changes these edicts that are coming out on Friday afternoons are going to have are going to have on science on the future of discovery on curing cancer we're really feeling that threat. And so, what I wanted to do is talk a little bit about that uh, today in our current episode. Now, our main theme today is about the imbalance of credit in the scientific community. And we've really drilled down on the topic around women in science. And how they, over the decades, century, has not really been able to get the same credit as men. But we have to talk about all that's been going on just in the last one to two weeks. You know, we went from the freeze that we've already talked about to now this cutting of people, just firing a bunch of people. A bunch of people at the FDA. A bunch of people at the NIH. A bunch of people at the National Cancer Institute. And these are essentially all levels. Some of them leadership levels, some of them mid, some of them are the earliest hires, those within their first couple of years were fired on a dime, no matter what role they were playing. One person that I know, I used to coach her in basketball when she was a young woman. Now she's a grown woman and she's an epidemiologist working at the FDA. And because she's only a year and a half into her career, she was fired on Friday afternoon. And what she was doing was reviewing medical devices to make people better able to get around. Accessibility was what she was all about, and now no one's doing that job. So, I don't know, will there be no improvements in accessibility because those people are not there?We then had the cap on indirects applied. All the cancer center directors got an email around that. All the medical center leaders and academic center leaders got the email. And so, we're all scurrying around to see what can we still do moving forward. What do we have to stop on a dime in order to keep the books open and to keep everything going the best we can. What will be the future of research and science in the current world without all of this infrastructure?Diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility. Gone. Right? So, if we can't have that, how will we acknowledge and credit those folks whose role it is to make sure that we are hiring the best person, not the person who looks like the last person, right? So, quality and qualifications are what DEIA was all about. Not about what others seem to think it's all about. So how are we going to maintain that and will the quality of those folks that are in these positions therefore fall because we're not hiring the best people.MedBuzz: Welcome to the Healthcare Hunger GamesJohn Marshall, MD: In our world here in Washington, we've been on this wild swing back and forth where, one Friday, we think that our fellows are no longer going to be hired, that they're going to all be fired. All trainees within the NIH are going to be fired. That was the word. Then it was like, no, we think they can stay, but then, later on this week, it's back on the table. So, we're being called to immediate meetings to say, well, are we going to have fellows from the NIH or not going forward? And if you think about what that would do, not only to them as individuals, but how about all the people that they are taking care of, all the people that are on clinical trials that are getting lifesaving care for cancers and other illnesses that those fellows are critical in providing their care and learning as for the next generation, and so I don't really know. where we are. I've been in cancer center meetings all week long about what we can keep, what we're not going to be able to keep. What sorts of progress can we make? Is it worth writing grants anymore? Should we just give up on this for the moment, tread water and wait, and see? My wife went down to one of the protests, and I know they happened all across the country and there were a lot of people there, who came out all across the country to say, none of this makes sense. This is not good for each other. This is not good for us. And most of us are sitting around thinking, well, who is it good for? Why is this being done? Is there a methodology? Is it just random? Is it just random rich people who are playing with us? Is it random rich people who are reducing government so that they can reduce taxes so they can have even more money? We don't know. We don't know if there's a strategy here ...
まだレビューはありません