Dr. Andy Wang 🇺🇦

@Cool_Ustaz Learn the rules

Congrats to @andyzwang & all fellows inducted to the @AcadofInventors #NAI2026 tonight. Certainly recognizes a lifetime of achievement and innovation for betterment of all humans/society. @UTSW_RadOnc @UTSWMedCenter @OncoAlert @CAHON_hemonc

Our group @CharlesJiangMD @andyzwang #AngelLu found a signal in real world data for PCSK9 inhibitors improving IO effect. OS difference w/out diff in cardio events. Pub’d concurrently today @JAMANetworkOpen. See you at posters! @ASCO #ASCO26 @OncoAlert @urotoday @OncBrothers

@unicodacorn @kiel_olumuyide @drterrysimpson I don’t want to argue this as it is off topic at this point. But look at the groups actually went after affirmative action. Asian kids were used as pawns because it was hard to justify…

@andyzwang @kiel_olumuyide @drterrysimpson That's why it has become Asians against other minorities. This argument of doing more to compete against white is foolish when all minorities are doing the same. That's what they should have went after and instead of low hanging fruit of attack another marginalized group

The irony is that many people screaming “science,” “objectivity,” and “data” throughout this Medical School admission debate seem remarkably uninterested in the actual literature on medical education, physician performance, public health outcomes, or diversity in medicine. Instead, they reduce the entire question of physician quality to standardized testing distributions while ignoring evidence that small MCAT differences among already highly capable applicants do NOT reliably predict who becomes the best clinician. And legally, much of the outrage misunderstands the 2023 Supreme Court decisions as well. Those rulings limited explicit race-based admissions preferences, but they did NOT abolish holistic admissions or require medical schools to become pure MCAT sorting machines. Schools may still evaluate leadership, adversity, service, communication, resilience, life experience, and institutional mission. A great deal has also been made of statistics claiming Black applicants are more likely to receive interviews than Asian applicants with similar MCAT ranges, as though this alone proves some grand reverse-racism conspiracy. But notice how selectively people interpret representation. At Yale, Black students comprise roughly 10% of the medical student body while Black Americans are closer to 13–14% of the U.S. population. Asian students comprise roughly 27% of the student body while representing a much smaller percentage of the overall population. One disparity is treated as obvious discrimination. The other is treated as obvious merit. That alone should make intellectually honest people pause. The people claiming to defend objective evidence seem curiously unwilling to follow that evidence once it complicates the story they emotionally prefer.

@kiel_olumuyide @unicodacorn @drterrysimpson We are there. I have served on admissions at different levels. I try with mentorship. Key is to create opportunities early. But this pitting is detrimental to the cause. We all lose. See the ugly posts on the high % of Asian American valedictorians in ny

@andyzwang @unicodacorn @drterrysimpson I do agree that minorities shouldn’t be pitted against each other, especially by White commentators. What I’ve personally seen is more Asian Americans supporting the anti-Black comments rather than defending Black people. WOULD be nice to see support against anti-Black narratives

@unicodacorn @kiel_olumuyide @drterrysimpson That’s not my argument. Not even close. Again, it’s not productive or good to use one minority group against another. Most of us are not the opposition

@andyzwang @kiel_olumuyide @drterrysimpson Research has shown how the current pool of doctors (predominantly white and asian) have underperformed with minorities groups which is why public health has focused on bring diverse doctors into the fold.

@unicodacorn @kiel_olumuyide @drterrysimpson Not what I said-see my text. I said it shoudn’t be Asians against other minorities. And the previous policy lost at Supreme Court because it was used against Asians-we had to do more than white…

@andyzwang @kiel_olumuyide @drterrysimpson So it's fine that Asians and White over represent other minority group in medical programs & field while we currently have the statistics to show the huge disparity in public health amonst other non-Asian minorities.

@unicodacorn @kiel_olumuyide @drterrysimpson It was not supposed to but it did. I do believe in under-representation but I don’t think there has to be “over”. If there were just 2 groups: under represented and not, we wouldn’t be in this situation today

@andyzwang @kiel_olumuyide @drterrysimpson It did not hurt Asian American groups. What hurt them is not focusing on legacy and development applicates.

@kiel_olumuyide @drterrysimpson We should acknowledge that the previous system did hurt Asian american groups and people have strong feelings. But using Asians against other minorities is exactly what the other group want to do.

@andyzwang @drterrysimpson Do not act like parts of this narrative were not amplified by some Asian Americans. The reason he references Asians is due to public cases and discussions were pushed forward by some Asian American voices, alongside some white commentators who continue to feed the discourse.

@JeffAnderson_ Why do we have to peg Asians against Blacks like this admin wants to do. The real story here should be why Asian students have a harder time than even White students. I personally believe in taking background into consideration admissions.

Yale School of Medicine Has a total of 553 students across All four classes. Total Black students: 44. That’s ~10 per class. Total Asian students: 157. That’s ~40 per class. There are nearly as many Asian students PER CLASS as there are Black students in the entire school. Black: 14% of America. Only 7% of Yale Med Asian: 7% of America. 28% of Yale Med. Who exactly is getting discriminated against here ? aamc.org/media/6131/dow…

@twillis209 @nomad421 He wrote about it, you can find it online. What happened to him didn’t sound right but doesn’t make it ok to do what he does now… he has always been on the cynical side but this is too much and not logical

@nomad421 Makes you wonder what changed. I didn't know of him before this turn but his publication record looks impressive.

Yes; Jason Locasale - whatever he may have been in the - has become a cynical, sour grapes, influence grifter. He also blocks anyone who disagrees with him & is seemingly unwilling to defend his bad takes.

@5_utr @BenMazer Look up the math for positive and negative predictive value for medical tests / screening diagnostics. The incidence of the disease matters. When it is rare like pancreatic cancer, the math gets hard …

@BenMazer Screening won’t work because why exactly? Prevention, screening, early detection, and local tx are the keys

It's impressive to try to dunk on Big Pharma and fail this badly. So many easy targets! A 6 month improvement in OS is meaningful and difficult to achieve in a previously-treated advanced cancer. We all wish it was better. Also, screening won't work: pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10…

@aaronmring As this drug move to earlier lines of therapy, the survival benefit will increase. Unresectable disease may become resectable etc. it won’t be just 6-7 months in the near future …

Life is precious. When you belittle the real benefit of a drug, you belittle the value of the extra time it gives patients and families. Months matter. Birthdays matter. Trips matter. Time matters. What a ratio. Delete your account, Jason.

@MartinShkreli @LocasaleLab Yeah and people who are poopoo this big win don’t really understand how drug development works. These drugs are tried in the most challenging situations first where survival benefits are really hard to get. Once they win, they move up to earlier lines where benefits are bigger

@LocasaleLab Dude wtf

Over 50,000 people in the U.S. die from pancreatic cancer every year. After this drug is approved and widely used, that number will remain essentially the same. In absolute terms, they are reporting a median survival shift of around six months. Yet we know resistance inevitably develops, as it does in all cancers subjected to drugs targeting mutations in the RAS/MAPK/PI3K pathway. If the goal is to meaningfully reduce cancer mortality, this does not move the needle. This is where decades of focus and billions in NIH/NCI funding have concentrated. National Cancer Institute is funded at roughly $9 billion per year, and a substantial portion of that budget is devoted to oncogenes and what is marketed as targeted therapies. This is then layered on top of a drug development and healthcare model where drugs like this can cost over $100,000 per patient. These are incremental gains at the late metastatic stage, where the biology is already stacked against you. Meanwhile, the two areas that actually determine population-level outcomes—early detection and prevention—remain neglected. If we are serious about reducing the number of people who die from pancreatic cancer, the priority cannot be continuing to optimize late-stage interventions that predictably yield temporary gains. The goal should be zero deaths. Right now, we are not on a path that gets us there. It is not surprising that this view is being met with backlash. Much of the criticism is coming from people whose incentives—academic , financial, or institutional—are tied to maintaining the current system in biomedical research and the biotech and pharma sectors that profit from it.

@AmericanAir don’t book your customers on Austria air! We booked through AA and you put us on Austrian. It’s our worst experience in international flying. Can’t get our boarding pass and they only allow tiny bags as carryons.

@AssemblyCall Billy Bob thorton

Has to be one of: - Bob Odenkirk - Steve Carrel - Bryan Cranston - Or darkhorse ... Jonathan Banks. - Or really darkhorse (but funny if you really think about it) ... Brian Regan

@MattHayesCFB They need to clone Cignetti to do it…

Stop saying if Indiana can do it, anyone can -- because they can't. usatoday.com/story/sports/n…

Let’s clear up some ~myths~ around Indiana football. IU had 28 players in their last yr of eligibility in 2025. Yes, it was T-6th most at the FBS level. But of the 18 FBS teams w/ 24+ players in last yr of eligibility in 2025… Only 2 (IU, TTU) made the CFP. IU also did NOT rank Top 10 nat’l in NIL spending in 2025. Only 5 of those teams made the CFP. If it was just about age & money… Everybody would simply go 16-0!

@JeffRabjohns The only reason this game was tough/close was because the refs let this stuff happen. And all kinds of pass interference / holding not called so the game was close …

That is the definition of targeting. #iufb #CFBPlayoff