List Price $27.95
Your Price $14.00
(Used, Hardcover)
More reviews from Washington Post Book World
|
 |
Medical Apartheid: the Dark History of Medical Experimentation on Black Americans From Colonial Times To the Present (07 Edition)
by
Harriet A. Washington
Unequal Treatment: How African Americans Have Often Been the Unwitting Victims of Medical Experiments
A review by Alondra Nelson
The Tuskegee Syphilis Study remains an ignominious milestone in the
intertwined histories of race and medical science in U.S. society.
Initiated in 1932, this tragic 40-year long public health project
resulted in almost 400 impoverished and unwitting African American men
in Macon County, Ala., being left untreated for syphilis. Researchers
wanted to observe how the disease progressed differently in blacks in
its late stages and to examine its devastating effects with postmortem
dissection. A fresh account of the Tuskegee study, including new
information about the internal politics of the panel charged by the
Department of Health, Education and Welfare with investigating it in
1972, lies at the center of Harriet A. Washington's courageous and
poignant book. The balance of Medical Apartheid reveals, with
arresting detail, that this scandal was neither the first chapter nor
the last in the exploitation of black subjects in U.S. medical
research. Tuskegee was, in the author's words, "the longest and most
infamous -- but hardly the worst -- experimental abuse of African
Americans. It has been eclipsed in both numbers and egregiousness by
other abusive medical studies." Although medical experimentation
with human subjects has historically involved vulnerable groups,
including children, the poor and the institutionalized, Washington
enumerates how black Americans have disproportionately borne the burden
of the most invasive, inhumane and perilous medical investigations,
from the era of slavery to the present day. (This burden has become
global in the last few decades.) In 1855, John "Fed" Brown, an escaped
slave, recalled that the doctor to whom he was indentured produced
painful blisters on his body in order to observe "how deep my black
skin went." This study had no therapeutic value. Rather, fascination
with the outward appearance of African Americans, whose differences
from whites were thought to be more than skin deep, was a significant
impulse driving such medical trials. Shielding whites from
excruciating experimental procedures also proved a powerful motivation.
J. Marion Sims, a leading 19th-century physician and former president
of the American Medical Association, developed many of his
gynecological treatments through experiments on slave women who were
not granted the comfort of anesthesia. Sims's legacy is Janus-faced; he
was pitiless with non-consenting research subjects, yet he was among
the first doctors of the modern era to emphasize women's health. Other
researchers were more guilty of blind ambition than racist intent.
Several African Americans, including such as Eunice Rivers, the
nurse-steward of the Tuskegee study, served as liaisons between
scientists and research subjects. The infringement of black
Americans' rights to their own bodies in the name of medical science
continued throughout the 20th century. In 1945, Ebb Cade, an African
American trucker being treated for injuries received in an accident in
Tennessee, was surreptitiously placed without his consent into a
radiation experiment sponsored by the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission.
Black Floridians were deliberately exposed to swarms of mosquitoes
carrying yellow fever and other diseases in experiments conducted by
the Army and the CIA in the early 1950s. Throughout the 1950s and '60s,
black inmates at Philadelphia's Holmesburg Prison were used as research
subjects by a University of Pennsylvania dermatologist testing
pharmaceuticals and personal hygiene products; some of these subjects
report pain and disfiguration even now. During the 1960s and '70s,
black boys were subjected to sometimes paralyzing neurosurgery by a
University of Mississippi researcher who believed brain pathology to be
the root of the children's supposed hyperactive behavior. In the 1990s,
African American youths in New York were injected with Fenfluramine --
half of the deadly, discontinued weight loss drug Fen-Phen -- by
Columbia researchers investigating a hypothesis about the genetic
origins of violence. Washington's litany of experimental misdeeds
done to African Americans is more extensive than can be described here.
With such damning evidence, one wonders why she felt it necessary to
include examples that, while clearly offensive, do not rise to the
threshold of medical experimentation. For instance, supporters of
slavery, to justify the peculiar institution, cited data from the 1840
census showing that free African Americans had poorer mental and
physical health than enslaved blacks. Nonetheless, taking ideological
liberties with questionable statistics is not, in and of itself, an
example of medical experimentation, nor was circus impresario P.T.
Barnum's display of black Americans as entertainment. While
demonstrating the widespread exploitation of blacks, it confuses the
thrust of Washington's argument. But Washington also sheds light
on how our understanding of what constitutes medical research requires
broadening in the face of new developments in genetic science. Federal
and state forensic DNA databases contain a disproportionate number of
samples from African Americans, for example. Because genetic samples
collected for this purpose carry information about a subject's health,
blacks are particularly vulnerable to the exposure of sensitive medical
information. And although experimentation with human subjects is less
invasive than it once was, Washington cautions that it is no less
injurious. Researchers still need to be mindful of the rights of their
subjects. Given the history presented in Medical Apartheid,
it is no surprise that some African Americans continue to regard the
medical system with apprehension, despite more stringent safeguards
enacted by the federal government in the 1970s. Washington attributes
this outlook, which she calls iatrophobia, to the seeds of distrust
sown in black communities by the Tuskegee scandal and a history of
lesser-known mistreatment. Washington, a visiting fellow at Chicago's DePaul University, intends that Medical Apartheid
serve a socially therapeutic -- if not cathartic -- function. Laying
bare these atrocities, her logic goes, will foster healing and frank
but necessary conversation. Clearing the air may encourage a better
informed African American public to participate in clinical trials. Despite
the author's best intentions, the scale and persistence of the "dark
history" she delineates may well preclude such a development. Precisely
because Washington's account of racially stratified medical
exploitation is so gripping, it may be difficult for the public to
muster enthusiasm to enter clinical trials, no matter their cultural
background. And with the experimental research burden shifting from
Americans of African descent to Africa itself (which Washington calls a
"continent of subjects"), Asia, and Latin America, where some cavalier
researchers are seeking more plentiful and pliant subjects, readers may
be more convinced than ever of the durability of the medical color
line. Alondra Nelson, an assistant professor of African
American studies and sociology at Yale University, is writing a book,
Body and Soul: The Black Panther Party and the Politics of Health and
Race.
Read more about this book
|
The
Washington Post Book World gives
readers comprehensive literary coverage, including reviews, news briefs,
and guest essays from authors. It's a weekly package of reviews, essays, and features on what's hot in the
literary world and can also be seen on WashingtonPost.com. Click here
for additional reviews and live web chats with reviewers.
|
|