Talk:Hispanic paradox

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment[edit]

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 23:30, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Miscategorized[edit]

I don't think it's correct to categorize this article as a "paradox". --Popperipopp 10:26, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Self contradictory[edit]

The anonymously posted last paragraph essentially ignores the findings reported in footnotes 1 and 2. Not sure what to do since I can't contact the author. Patience is requested. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rwinkel (talk • contribs) 04:08, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Removed last paragraph[edit]

I don't mean to be antisocial but since I had no way to contact that person ... If you come back please check the footnotes (1-4) and if you still decide this is purely a matter of acculturation feel free to restore it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rwinkel (talk • contribs) 21:35, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Recommend deleting reference to birth trauma as cause of Hispanic Paradox[edit]

Because I am new to editing Wikipedia articles, I'm not comfortable editing the page itself, but I recommend deleting the idea that birth trauma is the cause of the Hispanic Paradox. I suggest deleting this source as irrelevant and misleading:

^ Munchausen Obstetrics http://www.math.missouri.edu/~rich/MGM/birthUSA3.txt

Footnote 1 contains the main source for understanding the Hispanic Paradox, which is a Science now article. We can thus delete the link to the "archived" site since it conains a link to the birth trauma theory and is doing more than being an archived site, so I recommend deleting:

archived at: http://www.math.missouri.edu/~rich/MGM/birthUSA1.txt

Foodnote 2 has the same problem. A perfectly accssible link to a scientific article is called "formerly" even though it is available, and a link is put to an archived site, which again contains the birth trauma information.

The writers who describe the Hispanic Paradox propose note that Hispanics living in the US have better mental health than would be expected given their SES. This is a phhenomena much larger than hispanics per se, and has been discussed in many places, such as in a recent Harvard Magazine article. The main idea is however cited in the Bowers' ScienceNews articles, which is "immigrants' health deteriorates with assimilation to U.S. society". Immigrants born outside the US have the best mental health, followed by children of immigrants born in the US. By the third generation, rates of poor mental health reach the low levels of European Americans who have lived in the country for generations. The cause appears to be associated with the American lifestyle, as suggested by Arthur Kleinman, author of Culture and Depression, and its focus on individualist achievement at the expense of family relations.

I agree with the "miscategorized" comment, but note that the term Hispanic Paradox is used. Ideally this topic would be subsumed under a page about immigrant health.

Caldwell-Harris (talk) 23:34, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding most recent suggestions[edit]

1) the munchausen obstetrics article (footnote 4) is hardly irrelevant given footnotes 2 and 3, which clearly show that the decisive factor in the "paradox" is place of birth. The logical question given this observation is, what is it about US obstetrics which might affect such health statistics? Given the widely understood and accepted phenomenon that animals readily imprint their earliest experiences, it stands to reason that needless trauma should be avoided around the neonatal period. Follow the links in the article and you'll see that this lesson is apparently not taught in american medical schools. Less developed countries like mexico, and regions which support professional midwives like europe, naturally tend to follow a less interventionist approach which is less likely to be imprinted as traumatic by the infant, assuming millions of years of evolution are to be trusted.

Assuming there is something to this theory, it would also explain the observed convergence to statistical "normalcy" of successive generations, as native-born parents' own imprinted trauma would probably adversely affect family dynamics and their native-born children's socialization. The handwaving argument about acculturation to the "american lifestyle" is not even a well stated hypothesis, much less a testable one. In contrast, the specific phenomenon of birth imprinting is universally understood to occur in animals, although hardly ever raised in the human context. Unresolved imprinting issues can have life-long and multigenerational impacts, as any neonatal psychologist will tell you. (http://www.birthpsychology.com)

2) footnotes 2 and 3 are archived because sciencenews.org seems to be reorganizing their web site. At the moment footnote 2 is publically available, but footnote 3 is not. At other times I've noticed that neither article is public.

3) it is unlikely that this hypothesis will receive a fair hearing in a mainstream medical journal, given the reluctance of even sciencenews to address the issue head on. Yet it is being raised in numerous places around the net by well credentialed scientists and obstetricians, as the references in footnote 4 demonstrate. It should not be necessary to point out that this hypothesis, if proven, has the potential to provoke a huge scandal in american medicine and beyond, as the social ramifications sink in with policymakers and the public. Medical/institutional conflicts of interest are quite likely to eclipse science and children's human rights if this debate is confined to conventional academic circles, as can be readily seen to have occurred in the case of circumcision (http://www.math.missouri.edu/~rich/MGM/primer.html) Thus the need for an impartial hearing in other media, such as wikipedia.

--Rwinkel (talk) 20:54, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Incorporate external references[edit]

Reference [4] is an "excerpt from a letter to a legislator", presumably written by the page creator, Rich Winkel, who is listed as a Systems Analyst at the University Department of Mathematics (http://www.math.missouri.edu/personnel/other/winkelr.html). While it may contain authoritative sources, by itself - unpublished, not peer-reviewed - it is hardly authoritative and needs to substantiate what appears as original research. I suggest extracting the actual references out of this letter and including them on this page. I have not made the change yet, respecting the judgement of wikiuser Rwinkel who left the previous comment and appears to be the same as the creator of the document [4]. Zapiens (talk) 19:55, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Go for it!![edit]

Please feel free. You might also find the following useful for a more birds-eye view of the issue:

http://www.math.missouri.edu/~rich/MGM/wiki.txt

Of course the "hispanic paradox" is more properly seen as only one empirical facet of the much larger issue, so this entire page needs reconstruction and incorporation into a larger framework. --Rwinkel (talk)

More context for this issue[edit]

Democracy Now did an excellent piece on the role of early childhood experiences in the rise of numerous syndromes which are pathologized by medicine and society. Unfortunately they didn't go back far enough (to perinatal experiences) or address the issue of medicine's role in perpetuating and spreading these problems in society. But it's a good start:

http://www.democracynow.org/2010/12/24/dr_gabor_mat_on_the_stress

Rwinkel (talk) 19:40, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Research shows child rearing practices of distant ancestors foster morality, compassion in kids

http://newsinfo.nd.edu/news/16829-research-shows-child-rearing-practices-of-distant-ancestors-f/

--Rwinkel (talk) 12:48, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Check out this horror show. A mailing list for ob-gyn's detailing how they use cytotec (a drug approved for gastric ulcers, which was discovered to cause miscarriages) to force delivery on demand. These people have lost their minds.

http://www.sciencebasedbirth.com/Citations%20or%20text%2002/Cytotec_EmailsDocs_1990s.htm

We should be outraged.

Rwinkel (talk) 11:57, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Expansion of the Scope[edit]

The Hispanic Paradox is an important health phenomenon, and though the existing article explains some aspects of it, I propose to expand upon the existing article. I plan on expanding the article and organizing it into categories that will explain in detail several aspects of the paradox. Specifically, I will go into greater detail about health outcomes (i.e. morbidity and mortality) existing in the Hispanic population of the United States. I would like to expand upon the "salmon bias hypothesis" and the "healthy migrant effect" that are mentioned in the current article. I will also add to the section to discuss residential segregation and the "barrio advantage." I would like to expand upon the belief that there is actually no Hispanic Paradox in existence. Lastly, I will add a section that compares Hispanic health indicators to those of other minority/immigrant populations in the United States to give the article a broader perspective of the issue. I will be looking at the resources already listed on the discussion page for this article, but any resources or additional feedback on my proposed edit will be welcomed. I look forward to expanding this entry. Mschweickart (talk) 03:31, 20 October 2011 (UTC)Mschweickart[reply]

IMHO, any edit needs to at least acknowledge the importance of the birth imprint wrt health outcomes. Throwing away empirical evidence with a sound theoretical foundation makes no sense. Rwinkel (talk) 06:13, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Response to Recent Deletion[edit]

As far as empirical evidence, Mschweickart seems to have drawn her evidence with regard to residential segregation from two of the most influential scholars in the field of sociology including Douglas Massey and John Milton Yinger, who have both previously served as presidents of the American Sociological Association. Thus the deletion of this section of the article is ill-judged and the content of this section should be added back to the article. FrancescaSchley (talk) 03:30, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. The proposed changes by Mschweickart seem to be accurate. Not only is she using sources already given but also adding two major contenders in the field . I am eagerly awaiting the re-posting of the changes proposed by Mschweickart.It will add depth and focus to this page. Asiamcclearygaddy (talk) 16:38, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

By all means add it back, but also preserve the existing pointers to the well-founded hypothesis that at least some of the effect is related to differences in obstetrical practices. Rwinkel (talk) 18:27, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have restored most of the material added by Mschweickart, as it appears to be based on reliable sources and adds a good deal of useful information to the article. @Rwinkle: If you have specific concerns to raise, it would be better to discuss them on the talk page and reach consensus rather than simply deleting all of someone's work en masse. Kaldari (talk) 22:50, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
My apologies, it was late and I was bit miffed. After all, Mschweickart didn't discuss his proposed changes either, and his edit completely overlooked the imprinting issue wrt differences in obstetrical practices. But it's a good edit otherwise. Rwinkel (talk) 16:28, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Mschweickart's addition and believe it adds a lot to the content and knowledge base of the page. As FrancescaSchley noted, the sources used for this addition are not only reliable sources, but written by notable authors. Perhaps some edits can be made to accomodate both Mschweickart and Rwinkle's views, but all in all, a solid addition. MariaNunez (talk) 22:52, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 23:33, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hispanic paradox → Hispanic paradox –

  • WP does not normally upcase theories, rules, laws, principles, and paradoxes. The Paradoxes category is full of lower case, quite properly. Per WP:MOSCAPS ("Wikipedia avoids unnecessary capitalization") and WP:TITLE, this is a generic, common term, not a propriety or commercial term, so the article title should be downcased. Lowercase will match the formatting of related article titles. Tony (talk) 04:09, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Moved Noncontroversial move. Alpha_Quadrant (talk) 23:20, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

"Obstetric Violence" introduced as new legal term in Venezuela[edit]

The law defines obstetric violence as “…the appropriation of the body and reproductive processes of women by health personnel, which is expressed as dehumanized treatment, an abuse of medication, and to convert the natural processes into pathological ones, bringing with it loss of autonomy and the ability to decide freely about their bodies and sexuality, negatively impacting the quality of life of women.” ... The following acts executed by care providers are considered obstetric violence: (1) Untimely and ineffective attention of obstetric emergencies; (2) Forcing the woman to give birth in a supine position, with legs raised, when the necessary means to perform a vertical delivery are available; (3) Impeding the early attachment of the child with his/her mother without a medical cause thus preventing the early attachment and blocking the possibility of holding, nursing or breast-feeding immediately after birth; (4) Altering the natural process of low-risk delivery by using acceleration techniques, without obtaining voluntary, expressed and informed consent of the woman; (5) Performing delivery via cesarean section, when natural childbirth is possible, without obtaining voluntary, expressed, and informed consent from the woman. In these cases, the person or persons responsible are subject to a fine of two hundred and fifty (250 TU) to five hundred tax units (500 TU) and the court will submit a copy of the sentence to the professional body or union responsible for disciplinary actions. http://www.theunnecesarean.com/blog/2010/11/7/obstetric-violence-introduced-as-a-new-legal-term-in-venezue.html

'Without My Consent: A message from birthing women started last November as a small event to compile a series of photos and messages from birthing women telling the stories of the trauma and grief they experienced as a result of medical procedures performed on them or their babies without their consent. http://www.humanizebirth.org/blog/500-likes-for-without-my-consent

Google the term, there's a lot of info out there, although STILL little appreciation for the impact on the child.

Here's a normal birth: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=8kfccWzl7K0

Here's a typical american birth. Notice the difference in hormones, tactile sensory input and microbial environment for the baby. The baby reacts predictably. https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=b4lux3yuXIo

Rwinkel (talk) 15:54, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nutrition?[edit]

Provided that the effect is real in the first place and not an artifact, could nutrition be a factor? I'm reminded of the phenomenon that the adoption of westernised diets in aboriginal peoples regularly leads to a strong increase of diseases of affluence, while traditional diets seem to protect against these. Compare the Kitava case mentioned in Paleolithic diet. A diet even moderately influenced by a traditional Mexican diet (not quite a Mediterranean diet, but still) could presumably still confer a significant health advance against a Standard American Diet. Just wondering ... --Florian Blaschke (talk) 03:07, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

More corroboration of the obstetrical trauma theory[edit]

Urban poor aging faster at cellular level – study: New blood tests show that poor populations in urban areas of the United States are actually aging faster at the cellular level than others, thanks to chronic stress connected to income and identity, according to a new study by scientists.... The Stanford study marks the first collaboration between science and social research that measures telomeres – the caps on chromosomes that protect them from deteriorating.... They found poor whites had the shortest [telomeres] compared to nonpoor whites, and that poor and lower middle class blacks had equivalent [telomeres]. But poor Mexicans had longer telomeres than Mexicans with higher incomes....

http://rt.com/usa/257089-urban-poor-aging-faster/

... Our small sample size precluded disaggregating the Mexican population by nativity for statistical analyses, but we note that Mexicans in the nonpoor group were disproportionately U.S. born, while those in the poor group were disproportionately foreign born...Race-Ethnicity, Poverty, Urban Stressors, and Telomere Length in a Detroit Community-based Sample; Journal of Health and Social Behavior April 30, 2015

http://hsb.sagepub.com/content/early/2015/04/30/0022146515582100.full.pdf?ijkey=i9EQ5hpDJlBQ3Q0&keytype=finite

Childhood Trauma Associated with Short Telomere Length

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3152637/

As a side note, the paper's hypothesis for the equivalence of telomere lengths in the black community seems plausible and reinforces the importance of social networking. It seems whites suffer more from social isolation than either of the other two racial groups.Rwinkel (talk) 17:16, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Obstetrical abuse repeatedly exposed with no change in medical practice[edit]

What is the source of the inertia here? Is it really necessary to storm the ACOG meetings to force them to pay attention to their own research? At what point should the courts intervene? Should people be sent to prison?

Cruelty in Maternity Wards: Fifty Years Later

Abstract

Fifty years have passed since a scandal broke over inhumane treatment of laboring women in U.S. hospitals, yet first-person and eyewitness reports document that medical care providers continue to subject childbearing women to verbal and physical abuse and even to what would constitute sexual assault in any other context. Women frequently are denied their right to make informed decisions about care and may be punished for attempting to assert their right to refusal. Mistreatment is not uncommon and persists because of factors inherent to hospital social culture. Concerted action on the part of all stakeholders will be required to bring about systemic reform. Keywords: abuse of childbearing women, dysfunctional hospital social systems, patient safety, post-traumatic stress disorder

“Cruelty in Maternity Wards” was the title of a shocking article published just over 50 years ago in Ladies' Home Journal in which nurses and women told stories of inhumane treatment in labor and delivery wards during childbirth (Schultz, 1958). Stories included women being strapped down for hours in the lithotomy position, a woman having her legs tied together to prevent birth while her obstetrician had dinner, women being struck and threatened with the possibility of giving birth to a dead or brain damaged baby for crying out in pain, and a doctor cutting and suturing episiotomies without anesthetic (he had once nearly lost a patient to an overdose) while having the nurse stifle the woman's cries with a mask.

The article shook the country and triggered a tsunami of childbirth reform that included the founding of the American Society for Psychoprophylaxis in Obstetrics, now known as Lamaze International. Nonetheless, as Susan Hodges (2009) recently noted in her guest editorial published in The Journal of Perinatal Education, despite enormous differences in labor and delivery management, decades later, inhumane treatment remains distressingly common. American childbearing women still suffer mistreatment at the hands of care providers, ranging from failure to provide supportive care to disrespect and insensitivity to denial of women's right to make informed decisions to common use of harmful medical interventions to outright verbal, physical, and even sexual assault. Furthermore, the more extreme examples are not aberrations but merely the far end of the spectrum. Abuse, moreover, results from factors inherent to the system, which increases the difficulties of implementing reforms.

ABUSE IN CHILDBIRTH: PARALLELS WITH DOMESTIC ABUSE

According to domesticviolence.org (an online resource devoted to helping individuals recognize, address, and prevent domestic violence), domestic violence and emotional abuse encompass “name-calling or putdowns,” “keeping a partner from contacting their family or friends,” “actual or threatened physical harm,” “intimidation,” and “sexual assault” (“Domestic Violence Definition,” 2009, para. 2). In all cases, the intent is to gain power over and control the victim. One could add that perpetrators, obstetric staff or otherwise, feel entitled to exert this control on grounds of the victim's inferior position vis-à-vis the perpetrator as the following illustrate: ...

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2920649 Rwinkel (talk) 00:49, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Treating Hispanic as a race[edit]

I'm curious as to why there is no mention of the genetic makeup of mixed Latinos nor of the group's racial diversity, instead the article seems to treat the group as a single race that can be compared to the more homogenous non-Hispanic blacks, Asians and whites. Speaking of blacks and Asians, there is no mention if the paradox applies to Black Hispanic and Latino Americans and Asian Hispanic and Latino Americans in regards to the respective non-Hispanic group.

Instead, it is pretty clear that "Hispanic" for this article means mestizo, specifically Mestizo Mexicans (a genetically heterogeneous group). Yet there is no mention of "mestizo" or "mixed race" in this article nor of the very likely links such a mixed genetic heritage would have on an individual's health (see Population genetics). Also lacking is the mention of the health of Latin Americans- if this paradox holds true, you would see it play out across the region. Very disappointed by this article.

Entirely inexcusable that genomic studies are not mentioned when sources are so readily available:

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Hispanic paradox. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:53, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Not a paradox; it's the food (they're not genetically that different; and extremely elaborate explanations are excuses for one to eat junk food, or good food badly balanced; and Hispanics aren't gods; for example Japanese food leads to even higher longevity rates, but for a Caucasian usually it's easier to adopt to Hispanic dishes [seem more tasty to the average Caucasian; the point is to save lives, not to mimic the superior Okinawan diet and diet][edit]

6 Traditional Spanish Foods to Celebrate Hispanic Heritage Month

  • Tacos. Tacos are extremely versatile and can be incorporated into any menu. ...
  • Stuffed Peppers. Stuffed peppers in various forms are popular all around the world, including Hispanic countries. ...
  • Grilled Corn. ...
  • Mole. ...
  • Paella. ...
  • Margarita.

https://www.webstaurantstore.com › ... Traditional Hispanic Food for Hispanic Heritage Month - ...


If you try a different than food, more elaborate explaination, your cohort will die relatively younger, while the Hispanics carry their relatively larger testes around. (In every survey, the Hispanic male cohort has a bigger testicular volume than non Hispanic whites. I mentioned that because I want Caucasians to feel pain, because they harm fellow Americans with their eating habits. They should wake up, mimic a balanced diet, and live longer.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:587:4114:E700:ADC8:442:C2C7:4C3B (talk) 20:31, 2 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge of Culture and the Hispanic paradox into Hispanic paradox[edit]

I propose this merger because the topic already exists and the main article will not be too long if they are merged. Citrivescence (talk) 04:13, 10 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • I agree. I don't see why the "cultural" aspect should have its own article. Also, it appears to me it's in dire need of a copy edit. Best, — Preceding unsigned comment added by PK650 (talk • contribs) 22:57, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Makes sense, there doesn't seem to be a need for a sub-article here. Robofish (talk) 23:10, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  checkY Merger complete. Klbrain (talk) 07:56, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Siesta[edit]

I find it hard to believe nobody in this article even considered the fairly obvious possibility that the Latino tradition of siesta might have particular culture-wide rejuvenative effects on health. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 154.5.212.157 (talk) 10:27, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Hispanic_paradox&oldid=1204914437"