For Immediate Release
Contact: criticalraceframework@gmail.com

April 16, 2025

Dr. Christopher Williams, principal investigator of the Critical Race Framework, calls for an end to race science that aims for "shock value".

The dissemination of studies with crude racial categorization accompanied by fundings that elicit shock must end. Such papers can often be used to attract media and funder attention and to increase a researcher's profile without contributing meaningfully to scientific knowledge. There are usually three parts to the approach - a headline involving one or more racial minorities, a severe health condition or morality rate, and exposure, often related to race and racism. For example, the Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health recently posted on LinkedIn about a study at its institution, "Rise in Post-Birth Blood Pressure in Asian, Black, and Hispanic Women Linked to Microaggressions". The headline was "Asian, Black, and Hispanic Women". The health condition was post-birth high blood pressure - the exposure was microaggressions. Besides the assumption of racial monoliths, Dr. Williams raised some methodological issues in response to the post, "It seems odd that the authors would adjust for race-ethnicity given the nature of the study. They also controlled for education, BMI, chronic hypertension, age, and the Structural Racism Effect Index. As a reviewer, I would be fairly concerned with the risks of overcontrolling and the potential of a Type 1 error. Also, the race essentialism inherent in the study is a major concern." These type of "shock value" studies can have major caveats, even errors, that do not come across with a catchy headline.

In extreme cases, the motivation to leverage race essentialism for "shock value" can miss important aspects of the research itself. In a famous incident, a group of researchers claimed that "Black newborns die less when cared for by Black doctors". Because the paper was published at the height of the Black Lives Movement, few questioned the study findings. Further, a researcher from that study received a $5 million philanthropic gift to establish a university-based center. In a November 2024 publication, Harvard professors described how they repeated the study but added very low birth weight that was not included in the original analysis though key to the study of infant mortality. "When we estimated statistical models similar to those in the original paper, but controlling for very low birth weight rather than focusing on the health diagnoses that happen to be most common, these models fit the data better, and the apparent benefit to the racial concordance of black doctors with black babies falls dramatically—becoming statistically insignificant in models that include the other controls (hospital, insurance, etc.)," wrote George J. Borjas and Robert VerBruggen. 

The Critical Race Framework Study called attention to the misuse of racial variable in public health research. Its critical position points to deeper issues within the public health enterprise, including the parading of crude racialization as a value add to science. Race is not a valid or accurate reflection of populations. The notion of global races is rooted in 17th century thinking and justifications for slavery. Research ethics and professional standards require better public engagement and conduct.