Is it that hard to just collect data on economic status instead?

In any biostatistics project, we have to segment patient population into groups based on an amazingly large set of variables. race, sex, approximate age, approximate location, distance from doctor, economic status are just the first few. All of these can have an impact on outcomes that has to be managed.

Yes, a persons race does have an impact on outcomes regardless of economic factors.

Recently, a few conferences talked about us trying to ignore race and instead move to genetic haplogroups as (in essence) race was used just to get at these genetic conditions (from their haplogroup). Its too early to say if that will happen. I am guessing eventually yes but not in our lifetime.

Hope this helps.

Well the weird part here is it's separated to white and everyone else

I know of no variable we are trying to isolate with a 'white' vs 'everyone else' besides, perhaps, a hamfisted approach at trying to stratify over racism. Its very possible that the race of the healthcare provider has an impact depending on the race of the person receiving treatment, but I have no idea why they would make it 'white vs non-white' as the criteria.

I certainly wouldn't.

Skimming the paper results, it might have been dredging for a significant effect showing that white people are less-badly affected. "The vaccine has racist side effects" is an eye-catching headline.

I hate to be so cynical, but it's hard not to be.