Your ‘conspiracy theory’ is my blood and flesh
In the winter of 2004, a source first told me that the Federal government had sanctioned testing an AIDS vaccine on mostly black and Latino foster children ages 1 month to late teens. I did not believe it. When finally convinced that it was true, I sobbed openly as we walked through the park. I had only the back of my hand to wipe my eyes and my nose, but I didn’t care. I was so enraged and so impotent. It was excruciating and useless to have this knowledge because I didn’t have enough of the story to go to a reporter and it would be almost impossible to prove anyway cloaked as it was in the “private records” of foster children.
Then mercifully, a few months later, AP broke the story:
WASHINGTON – Government-funded researchers tested AIDS drugs on hundreds of foster children over the past two decades, often without providing them a basic protection afforded in federal law and required by some states, an Associated Press review has found.
The research funded by the National Institutes of Health spanned the country. It was most widespread in the 1990s as foster care agencies sought treatments for their HIV-infected children that weren’t yet available in the marketplace.
The practice ensured that foster children — mostly poor or minority — received care from world-class researchers at government expense, slowing their rate of death and extending their lives. But it also exposed a vulnerable population to the risks of medical research and drugs that were known to have serious side effects in adults and for which the safety for children was unknown. SOURCE
Then nothing; there was almost no reaction. This news didn’t even rate a “Frontline” or “Nightline” spot.
When many white people hear Reverend Jeremiah Wright preach about AIDS being created by the US government and given to African Americans, they laugh at his suggestion as preposterous. But most black Americans understand Jeremiah Wright’s suspicion. We understand suspicion because we remember that Indians were given blankets infected with smallpox by government. We understand suspicion because we remember the Tuskegee experiments. We understand suspicion because we remember that the CIA facilitated cocaine sales to the Bloods and Crips and channeled proceeds from those sales to Nicaraguan contra guerillas. We understand suspicion because we remember that black and Puerto Rican women were sterilized against their will by the US government. We understand suspicion because we know that on any day, another secret government sanctioned experiment that puts black people’s lives at stake will come to light. And we know there will be more after that. Here’s the latest:
BALTIMORE – Scientists using federal grants spread fertilizer made from human and industrial wastes on yards in poor, black neighborhoods to test whether it might protect children from lead poisoning in the soil. Families were assured the sludge was safe and were never told about any harmful ingredients.
Nine low-income families in Baltimore row houses agreed to let researchers till the sewage sludge into their yards and plant new grass. In exchange, they were given food coupons as well as the free lawns as part of a study published in 2005 and funded by the Housing and Urban Development Department.
The Associated Press reviewed grant documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act and interviewed researchers. No one involved with the $446,231 grant for the two-year study would identify the participants, citing privacy concerns. There is no evidence there was ever any medical follow-up. Sludge fertilizer program spurs concerns, Associated Press
Do you see now? Do you understand?
UPDATE – Senate Hearing Planned On Sludge, NAACP Watches On
hat tip Bakare Chronicles & African American Political Pundit
Posted by: Carmen D. in 
Oh my God. The sludge story is horrible enough … “assured it was safe.”
But I hadn’t even heard about the medical experiments, toxicity tests with no anticipated benefit whatsoever, on foster children. That’s right into Mengele territory.
April 15th, 2008 at 6:10 am -[...] Your ‘conspiracy theory’ is my blood and flesh. Carmen of All About Race discusses not just the history but the ongoing practice in the U.S. of [...]
April 15th, 2008 at 7:21 am -Yes, Tom. It is horrifying. Makes you wonder why you don’t know about this, right? Why wasn’t this story on the front page of every newspaper in America when it broke? It doesn’t fit America’s narrative about herself and so it is swept under other information.
April 15th, 2008 at 7:22 am -Okay… I understand suspicion. But the above examples need to be examined with a critical eye at rather than reflexively fueling further suspicion and polarization, which is not good for anybody. I am no fan of government, for several years all I did was litigate against the government (on environmental, not medical matters). Moreover, nobody can or should “trust” our government–it is only as good as us citizens force it to be, and it needs constant oversight and monitoring by us…. but but let’s not jump to conclusions to support a conspiracy theory based on incomplete and anecdotal evidence about complex subjects.
April 15th, 2008 at 8:00 am -First, if the experimental AIDS drugs were given to foster children suffering from AIDS, it doesn’t take much to see that there is indeed a potential benefit–a huge benefit–to doing so: they might work! They might help slow the AIDS or even cure it. It’s worth a try isn’t it? Haven’t people been asking for years for experimental AIDS drugs to be put on the market and not “withheld from those they might benefit”? In fact, isn’t the government criticized for this too? Obviously, children should not be test subjects. Only adults can consent to medical experimentation. But children can’t consent to medical treatment either, and yet we give it to them. Mightn’t these drugs have saved their lives, experimental though they were and doesn’t that mean maybe their lack of ability to consent should be overriden in their own potential best interest? These are complex subjects.
Second point: Correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe the AIDS virus affects disproportionately blacks (I don’t know if latinos are disproportionately affected also). As for infected children, aren’t there more AIDS infected black (and possibly latino) children than white children? If so, doesn’t it make sense to test the experimental drugs on that population rather than on a population (such as white children) whose reaction to the drugs may not carry results that would be as valid when the drug is applied to blacks (and possibly latinos)–which is the population most in need of the drug and most likely to be the biggest audience for it? I am not a medical scientist… but this just seems like common sense: you test the drug on the population most likely to need it because it would give you the most accurate feedback/results.
As for the sludge experiments… all I can say is I have seen it over and over. Bad stuff, toxic stuff, is emitted everywhere, usually intentionally. This happens because of greed, lack of sufficient government regulation, ignorance and many other causes. You have only to see the movie A Civil Action, for example, or to be aware of Love Canal (the first nuclean reactor disaster in the U.S.) to know that toxic poisoning of unfortunate and unwitting populations happens a lot. And not always to minorities. The least enfranchised segment of population will be the most affected by it in many ways, however. Is this racism? In a way, yes. Is it intentional malicious racism? I don’t think so. I think it’s simple efficacy for those in power, those who make the decisions, those who profit… let’s dump the stuff, or experiment with the stuff, on those least likely to complain or to be heard if they do complain. Whether they happen to white, black, latino, asian.. probably doesn’t matter to these corporate and government heads who make the decision to do this stuff.
All of this is just my own imperfect opinion… so please feel free to disagree with me! But I thought I’d try to offer a different perspective on the above since I don’t read it with quite the same eye as some others might.
i think i have a platform where i can focus some energy to make sure this kind of pseudo nazi concentration camp science is never practiced again. I am horrified to hear this and thanks for the tip. please send me info!
April 15th, 2008 at 9:33 am -Hey Gretchen, welcome to the conversation. Even after more than a year on this blog, I am disheartened when people who disagree with the observations of an argument seek to diminish the argument by framing it as not intellectual only emotional. You have done that by cautioning me not to look at things the way I see them but instead look at them as you see them – from your less “reflexive” and “polarizing” perspective. Where do I begin?
I’ll just address your foster care comment.
You wrote “First, if the experimental AIDS drugs were given to foster children suffering from AIDS, it doesn’t take much to see that there is indeed a potential benefit–a huge benefit–to doing so: they might work! They might help slow the AIDS or even cure it. It’s worth a try isn’t it?”
Perhaps you did not read the articles I linked to?
QUOTE: “Several studies that enlisted foster children reported patients suffered side effects such as rashes, vomiting and sharp drops in infection-fighting blood cells as they tested antiretroviral drugs to suppress AIDS or other medicines to treat secondary infections.
In one study, researchers reported a “disturbing” higher death rate among children who took higher doses of a drug. That study was unable to determine a safe and effective dosage.”
FURTHER: These were Phase I and Phase II drug trials. No mother in her right mind would consent to have any remotely healthy child participate at this stage.
” Phase I and II are the first two rounds of testing done on an experimental drug, which means they pose the highest level of risk without a foreseeable benefit for the children. The primary objective of Phase I and II tests is not to provide therapy to the patient-subjects. Rather, �
* The objective of a Phase I test is to assess the toxicity of a drug (i.e., how poisonous is the drug).
* The objective of a Phase II test is to assess whether a drug has any impact whatsoever on the intended disease (i.e., does it do anything vis-�-vis AIDS).
To paraphrase bioethicist, Dr. Arthur Caplan: if a phase I trial proved beneficial to a human subject, it would be reported as “a miracle!” These experiments were NOT conducted to save the children’s lives. The facts contradict the claims made by the NYC Administration of Children’s Services and the researchers involved. At the time the children were enrolled in these high risk experiments, there was no scientific basis for anyone to claim that:
1. the drugs were safe and not dangerous to the children; or that
2. the drugs held the promise of any therapeutic value whatsoever.”
Remember, many of these children were only PRESUMED to be HIV positive. I am astonished that you would argue that it might be “okay” for these vulnerable children to be stripped of their LEGAL RIGHTS in order that some rich drug companies would ultimately benefit from their use as guinea pigs. If parents would be clamoring for participation in such drug trials, then make an open call. Advertise and recruit participants in the same way as it’s done for other trials. Shame on you Gretchen for asserting that because these children belong to a population more impacted by HIV/AIDS that they might be less worthy of our care and protection.
Also, please explain the difference of impact between “racism” and “mailicious racism?” I don’t understand what you mean.
April 15th, 2008 at 10:47 am -me neither.
carmen…this is horrifying. and sadly, there will always be those, perhaps, who refuse to see. and make distracting and insubstantial excuses to continue not to see. we must do all we can to fight these injustices, and we must fight side by side with those who will not fall down a hole when we need them because they cant see the ground from the cliff.
thanks for posting this, i’ll link and comment by tomorrow’s close.
April 15th, 2008 at 3:55 pm -You made an excellent argument. I’m actually hearing Tupac’s “Dear Mama”, and reading this makes me wonder how many of these “children” are crying to their mothers now. Unfortunately, people think it’s OK to test other people’s children out without their consent. There’s no rationale that will convince me that that’s not at the very least criminal.
April 15th, 2008 at 5:37 pm -This is appalling but unfortunately not new. Carmen talks about Tuskegee but medicine (and science in general) has a long and sordid history of testing medical therapies/procedures/drugs/toxins on poor folks who are disproportionately black, latino, or native american. There was Dr. Marion Sims who experimented on African-American slaves to perfect surgical procedures for affluent white folk, radiation experiments on prisoners and citizens who were disproportionately black, forced sterilization in all corners of the country…I could go on. If anyone wants an interesting perspective into the on-going history of medical experimentation on poor, brown people then they should pick up a copy of Harriet Washington’s “Medical Apartheid,” it has been an illuminating read.
April 15th, 2008 at 8:21 pm -Sheesh, this is horrible, but really not surprising, given the run-down you gave of familiar racist experiments in the past. How nice it would be if, when American kids are taught about Nazi doctor experiments on Jewish prisoners, these similar American examples were added to the curriculum.
Nice answer to Gretchen too.
Macon D
http://stuffwhitepeopledo.blogspot.com/
April 15th, 2008 at 9:41 pm -(And thanks much for adding me to your blogroll! I’ll reciprocate when I get a list added to my site–was already planning to, actually.)
Macon D
April 15th, 2008 at 10:14 pm -Nez, yes horrifying is the right word. I think situations like this are too much for some people to handle because if they acknowledged the full depth and dimension of government supported abuse that goes on in this country, their world view would be changed. And for some that is simply out of the question.
Jose, I believe these actions are criminal. Why is no one in jail? And what are they testing right now…and on whom?
Hey Mike, welcome to the conversation. I want to read “Medical Apartheid.” Thank you for telling us about it.
Hi Macon D, welcome to the conversation. If America really wants a conversation about race and to remove our racial baggage from future generations, then let’s start with a comprehensive and honest teaching of history. Your site is great. I hope you’ll stay with it for a long time.
April 16th, 2008 at 5:58 am -I just came to this link from Nezua’s blog. That is horrible
Does anyone remember the story of two gay male nurses who’s foster child had AIDS? They took such good care of him the AIDS wasn’t even showing up in blood tests anymore, and so then suddenly the boy was adoptable. And I don’t know how the story ended up but they tried to adopt him, and they weren’t able to because they were gay. And I think they moved to Washington State, but because he was still technically from the foster care system in Florida (my home state, love/hate
) which prohibits gay people from adopting, they couldn’t do it. I think first just one of them tried to adopt by himself, making no mention that he was gay, but there was actually a box for sexual orientation and he left it blank, so that was enough for themto say to a guy filing for adoption by himself “nope”
My point of the story is good parents who make the effort to educate themselves about medical issues the best advocate for children with medical issues (I should know, I have Turners’ syndrome and thank my lucky stars for my parents – and I was involved in a medical study for human growth hormone, so I can echo what Carmen’s saying about the stages) and here’s a case where the kid had one and the gvmt. took him away from the parents because they were gay. More to the post topic, kids can’t make these kinda decisions on their own, they need an advocate, and the government wasn’t being their advocate in this situation. Carmen’s right, if they had parents who WERE, they wouldn’t have signed their kids up for this, and the gvmt should’ve taken the care of them that others wouldn’t rather than use them as lab rats.
April 19th, 2008 at 5:24 am -This is the fundamental disconnect that I think this country is seeing highlighted right now. I agree that covert testing on foster children is horrible and stupid. The government does horrible and stupid things more often than not (which is why I am libertarian and want to get rid of as much of the government as possible.)
But how do you make the leap from “the government tested drugs on black, latino and white foster children” to “the US created AIDS in an effort to exterminate black people as a race”? These really are night and day. In one case, you have stupid people doing something stupid that they at least think will help the people they are experimenting on. In the other, you have premeditated plan for genocide. The two are not comparable in most people’s minds.
April 30th, 2008 at 7:56 am -Hey Phelps, welcome to the conversation. As I have stated very clearly, although I do not believe the government created AIDS to perpetrate genocide, I do understand why many would so easily believe it to be true. And given Tuskegee, forced sterilization and other historic actualities that I reference in this post, some would say it would be naive not to wonder about government intentions from time to time.
April 30th, 2008 at 8:04 am -I wonder about government intentions, but more often than not, sloth and stupidity are a better explanation than malice. Tuskegee and the eugenic sterilization happened to powerless victims. Black people are no longer powerless in America. It is like when they asked Willie Sutton why he robbed banks. “That’s where the money is.” Tuskegee happened to black men because they were powerless more than simply because they were black.
April 30th, 2008 at 8:24 am -Phelps, you and I will agree to disagree about this. I believe one factor was powerlessness and one factor was race. If not, why not use men from Appalachia as well? Why wasn’t the study integrated?
April 30th, 2008 at 8:37 am -If you look at the literature on the medical research conducted on prisoners, you’ll find that those studies were incredibly segregated, with up to 80% of research subjects being African-American men. Now, African-Americans are disproportionately represented in the US prison system…but these studies did not proportionately use whites and blacks in these studies (it should have been about 60% white, 40% black if that were the case). A powerless study population with an unbalanced research cohort.
April 30th, 2008 at 2:25 pm -[...] mike: If you look at the literature on the medical research… [...]
May 1st, 2008 at 10:13 am -[...] getting missed may have shown itself to me. I’ve referred to it, but I’ve only seen one afro-centric blogger even make reference to it. And it is something that, and I’m speaking from the heart here, black people — sends [...]
May 1st, 2008 at 7:53 pm -