An argument in the cognitive enhancement literature is that using stimulants in populations of healthy but socially disadvantaged individuals mistakenly attributes pathology to nonpathological individuals who experience social inequalities. As the argument goes, using stimulants as cognitive-enhancing drugs to solve the social problem of poorly educated students in inadequate schools misattributes the problem as an individual medical problem, when it is really a collective sociopolitical problem. I challenge this argument on the grounds that not all types of enhancement have to be explained in medical terms, but rather at least one conception of enhancement can be explained in social terms-opportunity maintenance. Therefore, I propose that as a moral requirement we ought to explore whether stimulants could be a means of remedying underprivileged children's experiences of social inequalities that are borne from inadequate schools for the sake of increasing their chances for opportunities and well-being.

As a field concerned with ethical issues in health and health care, particularly how structures, policies, and practices unfairly advantage some and disadvantage others, bioethics has a moral obligation to address the long‐standing challenges that racism has posed to the overall health and well‐being of Black, Indigenous, and Latinx people and other people of color. Arguably, the premature death and disease disproportionately affecting Black Americans and the well‐documented association of such death and illness with racism are issues that have not gained due attention in bioethics. This multiauthored report highlights the intergenerational work of mostly Black scholars and aims to create an agenda for bioethics that addresses anti‐Black racism and the ways in which this form of racism threatens the actualization of justice in health and health care, not only for Black people and other minoritized groups but also for all people. This special report contains five major sections representing different approaches to scholarship, including theoretical, empirical, and narrative forms. The first section features two target articles focused on anti‐Black racism and health care settings, with each article accompanied by two commentaries. The second section includes four essays thematically centered around anti‐Black racism and health equity research and practice. Section three features four essays that explore anti‐Black racism and bioethics. The next section consists of four essays framing a braver, bolder, and broader bioethics. We conclude with a powerful tribute to the late Marian Gray Secundy, a bioethics luminary, friend, colleague, role model, and mentor, and a tie that binds together many bioethics scholars who prioritize social justice in their scholarship and praxis.

When health professions learners' primary pedagogical experience of Black people and how they become patients is through statistics, it becomes very easy for learners to think of Black people as data points rather than as individuals whose health is often at the mercy of racist institutions. When the human dimension of Black people's health is ignored, specifically the ways that poor health affects individual wellbeing, one of the barriers to proper health for Black patients is how to be seen and considered as a part of a larger problem of systemic racism and institutional injustices as well as individuals whose personal lives are affected by such larger problems. I propose an approach to health professions pedagogythe experiential race testimonies (ERT) approach-that can change the way health professions learners understand and treat Black patients, thus changing the future of Black health. The ERT approach pairs population data analysis with analysis of personal testimonies and the experiences they convey.

No abstract

No abstract