[1234throwaway]

The parent comment here said publicise, not publish. The studies will go ahead, but you won't see the mainstream media putting this on the front page.

The reason is that it's too sensitive. Look at the massive argument and tension that was generated just from someone pointing out that certain skin types are not suited to certain environments (melanin skin to north europe, non-melanin skin to australia) - nobody who values their political or academia career will want to touch this one, so the problem will get worse and worse, silently. It could even end up impacting educational and career outcomes in certain parts of the population that would appear to be racial characteristics because the science impacting those traits is a forbidden subject... which ironically makes people more racist.

[peteretep]

“How coronavirus tore through Britain's ethnic minorities”

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-52894225

“Socio-economic inequality means we're more likely to catch the virus, while our biology means we're more likely to die”

Literally just the first link that 10s of Googling found.

> from someone point internet out that certain skin types are not suited to certain environments

That’s because this is a crassly overloaded dog whistle statement.

“Ethnic minorities should supplement Vitamin D in winter” and “pale people should wear sunscreen in Australia” are in no way controversial or sensitive statements in science or academia or in the media. Trying to morph those into an argument that black people “aren’t suited for” Northern Europe is the racist, non-scientific bullshit people lose their positions for.

[jb775]

You won't see the mainstream media publicize any non-vaccine solution because they're in the business of fear-mongering and because they have a chummy relationship with big pharma.

[detaro]

Plenty of mainstream media has reported about the Vitamin D findings.