[Genuine Realist]

GR, I think you have too narrow a view.

First, there are two factors that affect minorities.  The first one is the likelihood of getting the virus, which is related to things like occupation, living conditions, etc.  The second one is the likelihood of dying once they do get the virus, which is also higher.  Some of that is due to comorbid conditions, but not all of it is.

Here are some plausible hypotheses:
1) Access to medical care.
2) Willingness to seek medical care for a number of reasons:
a) Distrust of the medical system.
b) Fear of financial impact or other social impact.
c) Lower health literacy.
3) Access to experimental therapy.
4) Quality of care rendered.
5) Limited social support system.
6) Lower socioeconomic status
7) Higher stress (associated with a whole host of adverse medical outcomes)
8) Poorer care for comorbid conditions (for example, not all diabetes is the same, and someone who has well-controlled diabetes is going to do better than someone who has long-standing uncontrolled diabetes).

And I am sure there are a lot of other factors that I haven't even thought of.  SOme of those can be measured; others, like distrust of the medical system are harder to measure.  Race and ethnicity are poor proxies for many of these factors, but sometimes they are the only measurable proxy, or the only proxy that can, in one fell swoop, account for the hundreds if not thousands of such unmeasured confounders.

BC

None of these factors (and I don't quarrel with any of them) reflect governmental policy or the proverbial barriers. All of them reflect the cultural overhang I mentioned.

More than that, very few of them apply to that sizable fraction of the demographic that stands on the other side of the wealth divide. I'm not going to grant a preference to a wealthy minority resident of Atherton or Los Altos Hills simply on the basis of ethnicity. That is actual racism,

[Genuine Realist]

GR, I think you have too narrow a view.

First, there are two factors that affect minorities.  The first one is the likelihood of getting the virus, which is related to things like occupation, living conditions, etc.  The second one is the likelihood of dying once they do get the virus, which is also higher.  Some of that is due to comorbid conditions, but not all of it is.

Here are some plausible hypotheses:
1) Access to medical care.
2) Willingness to seek medical care for a number of reasons:
a) Distrust of the medical system.
b) Fear of financial impact or other social impact.
c) Lower health literacy.
3) Access to experimental therapy.
4) Quality of care rendered.
5) Limited social support system.
6) Lower socioeconomic status
7) Higher stress (associated with a whole host of adverse medical outcomes)
8) Poorer care for comorbid conditions (for example, not all diabetes is the same, and someone who has well-controlled diabetes is going to do better than someone who has long-standing uncontrolled diabetes).

And I am sure there are a lot of other factors that I haven't even thought of.  SOme of those can be measured; others, like distrust of the medical system are harder to measure.  Race and ethnicity are poor proxies for many of these factors, but sometimes they are the only measurable proxy, or the only proxy that can, in one fell swoop, account for the hundreds if not thousands of such unmeasured confounders.

BC

None of these factors (and I don't quarrel with any of them) reflect governmental policy or the proverbial barriers. All of them reflect the cultural overhang I mentioned.

More than that, very few of them apply to that sizable fraction of the demographic that stands on the other side of the wealth divide. I'm not going to grant a preference to a wealthy minority resident of Atherton or Los Altos Hills simply on the basis of ethnicity. That is actual racism,