PubMed · 8061615
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
C Tanford. 1994. Macromolecules.. https://doi.org/10.1002/pro.5560030516
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
Addressing health inequity is now recognized as a clinical competency in medical education. We examined the career and writings of Robert Wilson Jr. (1867-1946), longtime dean of the Medical College of the State of South Carolina during the Jim Crow Era, using primary and secondary sources within the context of systemic and structural racism, particularly in South Carolina. Wilson used public health data to refute the "Black Extinction Hypothesis" rooted in social Darwinism. He challenged assumptions of inherent Black susceptibility to tuberculosis, linking disease instead to social determinants of health. He also identified disproportionate mortality from kidney and cardiovascular disease among Black populations, anticipating modern health disparities research. Wilson further acknowledged systemic injustice and implicated structural conditions, including housing, in shaping outcomes. In an era of continuing health inequity and racial health disparities, Wilson applied empirical evidence to reject biological determinism, identify outcomes disparities, and advocate for racial justice.
A personal narrative of my time in the Hunt laboratory and beyond is provided. The impact of the Hunt laboratory on the analysis of peptides and proteins by tandem mass spectrometry is described in the context of the time.
It is 27 years since Dr Franz Ingelfinger announced that a manuscript would be rejected by his journal, the New England Journal of Medicine, if it had been published elsewhere. Many other medical journals have since adopted this so-called Ingelfinger rule. The restrictions resulting from the rule have generated enormous controversy in medical journalism, as shown by the first of the two-part article The Ingelfinger rule, embargoes, and journal peer review. Critics say that the rule restricts the free flow of information, whereas proponents claim that information from a paper released early may be inaccurate because the paper has not been subjected to peer review. Yet peer review itself has also come under scrutiny, with its many limitations rarely being openly discussed.