We're watching and we're worried: A future doctor's call to action
"If physicians are not trained on specific health risks that directly impact transgender patients, how can we provide adequate care? If we are not taught about racial health disparities, how will we work to combat them? If we stop prioritizing inclusion, how can we ensure equal health care for all?" (Getty Images)
When the government puts legal barriers in place to strip away or prevent health care access, it's not just politics — it's real people's lives at stake.
During the summer of 2024, countless transgender and gender expansive patients expressed to me fears about what might happen to their access to gender affirming medical care if a conservative administration were to win the White House. This worst-case scenario became reality in the first weeks of 2025, when President Donald Trump signed an executive order redefining legal gender identity as a strict binary of male and female — effectively erasing recognition of nonbinary and transgender individuals and interrupting federal funding to institutions providing gender-affirming health care.
As a transgender health program intern, I have seen providers try to reassure patients of their well-being and safety while they themselves fear how their job will be affected if the laws would drastically alter the way we practice medicine.
As a gay man about to enter the medical profession, I am afraid. The recent wave of anti-trans initiatives pushed by this administration is part of a much broader effort to dismantle diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging (DEIB) programs across the country under the guise of 'restoring meritocracy' and 'leveling the playing field.' But in health care, the playing field has never been level. Minority populations continue to face disproportionate health risks and barriers to care.
DEIB is the foundation of medical education. It teaches future physicians how to address these disparities and combat the structural inequities that put vulnerable patients at risk. Studies show medical students have felt unprepared to manage transgender and gender expansive patients upon graduation. One study even claimed that only 27% of students were confident in their knowledge of the health needs of transgender patients. Beyond that, they could not correctly answer questions about race-related medical history despite affirming that understanding historical context is important in medicine. This lack of education was always a problem, and efforts were underway to solve it. Eliminating DEIB would not only erode this progress but set us back behind where we were even before we started.
In 2020, the American Association of Medical Colleges (AAMC) rolled out the Structural Competency Curriculum which aims to train providers 'to recognize and respond to the impact of upstream, structural factors on patient health and health care.' Since then, medical schools around the country have adopted the values of this curriculum and incorporated it throughout the course of their students' training. Health equity is a core pillar of medical students' professional development and should be embedded into the culture of patient-centric care.
When DEIB is dismantled, programs like these disappear, and awareness of health disparities among marginalized patient populations fades from the culture of those whose job is to provide the proper care and treatment.
If physicians are not trained on specific health risks that directly impact transgender patients, how can we provide adequate care? If we are not taught about racial health disparities, how will we work to combat them? If we stop prioritizing inclusion, how can we ensure equal health care for all?
Everyone deserves to be treated with respect and dignity. Legislation cannot change a person's identity, but it will change their access to health care. Medical schools need to teach this, and we as students want to learn. Future doctors like me are watching everything that is happening, and we are worried. When students apply to medical school, the number one question they are asked is, 'Why medicine?' While the answer to this question can take many different forms, the bottom line is pretty simple: We want to help people. Medical schools can make a monumental difference in how future doctors navigate this political environment and provide care to patients. We urge medical schools to keep teaching us how to do that for all patients.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Bloomberg
16 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Senate to Keep Spectrum Sales in Tax Bill, Key Republican Says
A key Republican said senators have reached an agreement to reauthorize spectrum sales to internet companies that would generate billions of dollars in revenue toward funding US President Donald Trump's sweeping tax cuts and spending bill. Spectrum sales were included in the House version of the reconciliation package but the provision had drawn objections from South Dakota Republican Senator Mike Rounds, who previously said they risked undermining the US military's communications capabilities.
Yahoo
19 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump's travel ban could drive some African nations closer to America's adversaries
Donald Trump's travel ban, a purportedly security-focused measure largely targeting African nations and Muslim-majority countries, underscores his administration's ignorant and potentially destructive approach to a continent with growing global influence. In announcing the ban, Trump said it's meant to ensure the U.S. only allows people to enter who 'do not bear hostile attitudes toward its citizens, culture, government, institutions, or founding principles.' Whereas the Biden administration took steps to ingratiate itself with African leaders and slough off some of the American paternalism that has driven some African nations closer to Russia and China in recent years, Trump's administration seems to have doubled down on an outmoded strategy of exploitation, conspiratorial brow-beating and ostracism. In just the first few months of Trump's second term, his administration has pressured African nations to permit Elon Musk's Starlink internet service to operate within their borders and has sought to use war-torn nations in Africa — including a country known for its human rights abuses — as landing spots for people booted from the U.S. as part of Trump's mass deportation plan. The president also personally turned the Oval Office into a screening room for bigoted conspiracy theories when he invited the president of South Africa to the White House and then bombarded him with false allegations of 'white genocide' being committed in his country. Needless to say, this hasn't helped the U.S. build on its rapport with African nations. And fundamentally, what that could mean for the U.S. is that a continent full of countries that American officials have pinpointed as crucial partners in our geopolitical strategies related to security and commerce could drift further toward our adversaries. That's certainly the vibe given off by the African Union Commission and its dozens of member states, which denounced Trump's travel ban and warned about its potential impacts. 'The Commission remains concerned about the potential negative impact of such measures on people-to-people ties, educational exchange, commercial engagement, and the broader diplomatic relations that have been carefully nurtured over decades. Africa and the United States share mutual interests in promoting peace, prosperity, and global cooperation,' the commission said in a statement, adding: 'The African Union Commission respectfully calls upon the U.S. Administration to consider adopting a more consultative approach and to engage in constructive dialogue with the countries concerned.' University of Michigan economics professor Justin Wolfers identified one clear way that Trump's travel ban could harm the American economy. 'One obvious economic implication of the latest travel ban is that genuinely international conferences will no longer be held in the U.S.,' he wrote on X. And that may just be the tip of the iceberg. It's also true that the materials used to make batteries in everything from cutting-edge cars to phones and computers most often come from African mines. Which is to say: Trump's cold shoulder toward African nations could have dire consequences for America's future, particularly with regard to the economy and U.S. national security. This article was originally published on
Yahoo
19 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Ukraine Just Demonstrated What AGI War Could Look Like
Engineers test drones at drone manufacturing facility in Odessa, Ukraine on June 01, 2025. The Ukrainian forces are producing new drones and electronic warfare systems. The facility is currently testing advanced models, including self-propelled land-based drone systems. Credit - Maksim Voytenko—Anadolu/Getty Images Bombers in flames on social media. Photos of trick shipping containers packed with drones. Defiant statements from both sides about the scale of the damage. On June 1, Ukraine targeted several Russian air bases using first-person view (FPV) drones, cheap aerial vehicles which are remotely operated by pilots using camera feeds. According to reports, Ukraine used machine-learning algorithms to guide the drones to the target area. The attack, dubbed 'Spider's Web', demonstrated the current hardware capabilities of modern warfare. And as companies and governments race to develop Artificial General Intelligence (AGI)—in which advanced artificial intelligence systems can quickly understand, learn, and apply knowledge—the operation also provides a glimpse into what the future of warfare could look like. The Security Service of Ukraine's (SBU) operation knocked out targets up to 8,000 kilometers (nearly 5,000 miles) from the frontlines. As the dust settles, analysts are starting to wonder whether anywhere is truly beyond the reach of FPV drones. Some reports suggest dozens of strategic bombers (some said to be capable of delivering nuclear weapons) were destroyed or disabled by 117 FPV drones, though Moscow countered that only a handful of planes were struck. Western assessments put the figure at no lower than 10. But the scale of the attack, while impressive, isn't its most remarkable aspect. After all, the operation follows a Russian drone attack at the end of May involving almost 500 unmanned aerial vehicles. Ukraine's attack may have been smaller, but it more than made up for it in logistical brilliance. First, the parts were smuggled into the country and the drones were assembled. Vasyl Maliuk, the head of the SBU tells the BBC that they were then loaded onto lorries with secret compartments and driven by unsuspecting Russian couriers to locations near air bases. When the shipments reached their destination, roofs on the lorries retracted to reveal the hidden hardware. And the drones took off. Spider's Web depended on three distinct but related capabilities: logistics to deliver the drones, deception to keep them hidden, and coordination to pilot dozens of them concurrently. Yes, the attack confirms that expendable drones are the weapon of the 21st century. But Ukraine's strike serves as a visceral example of how AGI will work as a warfighting tool—and how humans will work alongside AGI. Make no mistake, AGI-fueled warcraft is coming. Over the past two years, the AI industry has increasingly invested in military applications of AI and gravitated towards 'security' as one of its organizing principles. Frontier labs are embedding themselves into the national security state. For instance, in June 2024 OpenAI appointed retired U.S. Army general Paul Nakasone to its Board of Directors. In December 2024, the AI-giant announced it had partnered with defense military technology outfit Anduril to develop drone defense systems. And Google, my former employer, scoped out 'national security imperatives for the AI era' earlier this year. The technology sectors' allusions to national security and AI have a certain shape-shifting quality to them. It's not always clear whether someone is referring to defensive or offensive AI capabilities, or whether it is even possible to neatly separate the former from the latter. In the context of armed conflict, things get even muddier. The idea that a sufficiently capable AGI system might eventually pilot drones is already on the minds of military planners, but Ukraine's strike on Russia gives us a much more specific picture of what to expect. Spider's Web had been in the making for eighteen months. During this time,150 small attack drones and 300 explosive devices were smuggled into Russia to stage the attack. Rather than one large shipment, the SBU likely engaged in piecemeal smuggling to avoid detection. Possibly bringing components across borders, using front companies, or bribing officials to pass through checkpoints. The fog of war is thick. We may never know for certain, but we do know that the final drones were packed into special mobile containers that looked inconspicuous from the outside. According to reports, the drivers of the lorries all told a similar story. A businessman approached them to pick up what seemed to be wooden cabins and deliver them to various locations around Russia. They agreed and thought little of it. Once the trucks were in position, the strike was launched. At the predetermined moment, each container's roof panels were remotely opened to release a swarm of drones (likely piloted remotely by piggybacking on Russian telecommunications networks). Spider's Web offers a window into how AGI could supercharge similar attacks in the future. AGI could analyse transportation routes to find the safest, fastest, and least conspicuous way to move cargo. It could plan truck routes that avoid busy checkpoints, choose transit times when border guards are understaffed, and even account for satellite overpasses or drone surveillance. Such a system could coordinate multimodal logistics (think planes, trains and automobiles) with timing that no human team could match. Not to mention it could crunch traffic patterns, rail schedules, and weather data to find the perfect moment for an attack. This hypothetical warfighting AGI could automatically generate corporate entities complete with registration documents, tax records, and websites to serve as cover. It could forge driver's licenses, passports, and employee IDs that pass automated verification—much faster than humans today could. Aside from paperwork, an AGI could manage a whole suite of deception technologies. For example, AGI could emit fake GPS signals to confuse satellite tracking or hacking into a facility's CCTV feed to loop old footage while operatives move equipment. When it's time to strike, AGI could guide each drone to its target as part of a single unified swarm, optimised to prevent collisions and spaced to maximize coverage. AGI may even make it possible to monitor the electronic warfare environment and switch frequencies if it senses jamming on the current channel. If an air defense system starts tracking the swarm, the AGI might command all drones to disperse or drop to terrain-hugging altitude to increase their odds of survival. As soon as the destination is in range, AGI could help drones autonomously recognise target types and aim for the most damaging impact points (say by guiding a drone to the exact location of an aircraft's fuel tank). To be sure, these are still predictions about what AGI may be capable of in the future. And there will likely be limitations. Precision hand-work like soldering detonators, balancing rotors, and packing warheads remains hard to automate at scale without a bespoke factory line. Robots can do it, but you still need humans to do the initial set-up. Plus, explosives sweat, lithium-ion packs puff, and cheap FPV airframes warp if left in non-climate-controlled depots. Periodic maintenance like changing desiccant packs or swapping bloated cells would likely still remain vital. A swarm of AGI-powered drones would probably still need caretakers who can move around without drawing attention. Finally, jamming-resistant links need spectrum licences, custom SIM provisioning, or pirate base-stations smuggled in-country. Deploying that communications infrastructure (like antennae or repeaters) requires boots on the ground. But even with a heavy dose of scepticism, I find it hard to see the Ukrainian strike as anything other than a postcard from the future. Problems might look insurmountable to us, but you should never bet against the machine conjuring up an unorthodox solution. I fear that the best case scenario ahead of us is one where attacks such as these can simply be delivered slightly faster. The worst case scenario is one in which a Spider's Web-style operation can be conducted orders of magnitude faster by just a handful of people. Thinking about the implications of AGI is useful in that it reminds us that power flows to whoever can orchestrate complexity faster than the adversary can comprehend it. Complexity is the strategic currency of war in the information age, and AGI is a complexity accelerator. If AGI finds its way into the wrong hands, it could become much easier to pull off a deadly attack. That is as true for the great powers as it is for rogue actors. This is the new strategic reality, and every military has to plan for it. What Ukraine's Spider's Web strike taught us is that the hardware for an AGI warfighter is ready. All that remains is the software. Contact us at letters@
