From Flu Wiki 2

Forum: Name Calling or How to Deal with People You Don T Agree With

01 April 2006

Monotreme – at 17:55

The issue of Name Calling has been brought up several times by PathForward, first, in the Club of Worms thread, and more recently, at Effect Measure while Flu Wiki was down. I had previously responded to PathForward on the Flu Wiki thread, but did not do so at EM as I did not want to hijack that thread. Since this continues to come up, and I think important issues are involved, I would like to address the issue again.

There are several sorts of people I disagree with about pandemic influenza. My contention is that name-calling is not appropriate for most of these people, but is appropriate for one particular subset. Here I define the groups:

Here is one example of the consequences of this behaviour. In the 2003/2004 flu season, there was a mismatch between the flu vaccine and the circulating strain of influenza (H3N2). Although we don’t know how many deaths that year were due to the mismatch, its quite possible that it was in the thousands (children were especially hit hard that year, remember?). Those deaths are directly attributable to Dr. Julie Gerberding’s decision, as Director of the CDC, to hide the available flu sequences from other scientists, including those at the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Scientists at the NIH, because they were blocked from the CDC flu sequences, made their own arrangements to get flu sequences from New York and found out about the mismatch too late to change the vaccine. In essence, the CDC scientists had the sequences, but didn’t have the brains to see the mismatch. The NIH scientists ultimately got the sequences, but too late to change the vaccine. If the NIH scientists had gotten the sequences in time, it is likely that people who had died that year might have lived.

So, what is the politically correct term for Dr. Julie Gerberding? Ethically challenged? Scientific conduct-impaired? Frankly, calling her a “Worm” required alot of restraint from me.

You can read about this in this Nature article Flu researchers slam US agency for hoarding data. One excerpt:

One such swap made the virulent Fujian strain, which hit in 2003–04, and to which the annual vaccine was poorly adapted. “The minute we got our hands on some open data, it jumped out that here was something people were not aware of,” says one NIH scientist. “The CDC didn’t know what was going on with the Fujian thing, and by the time they realized, it was too late to use if for a vaccine.”

Dr. Julie Gerberding is now hoarding H5N1 sequences. The number who will die as a result of her persistent misconduct may increase greatly. Any other suggestions as to how to characterize this behaviour?

Snowy Owl – at 18:30

As you have stated it Monotreme, there is a lot of justification in denouncing people who have authority or pretend to have some and are in a diffusion mode.

When we edit or diffuse, we bear, IMHO a responsability to diffuse facts, no lies. Although in some specific cases omission of information could be justify, we witness to much ‘retention of informations’ that can indeed have desastrous effects.

There is one example that comes to mind. About a year ago, samples of a lethal strain was made worlwide. Here in Canada, in BC to be specific, Fraser University decided to go public about it even if, as so many would say, it could create panic, invite terrorism, create bad press for the Big Pharma or some institutions.

It did indeed stress a lot of people, but the Job got done.

As for the events at Effect Measure, I was please that Revere draw the line, with rigor, facts and Truth. Even if it meant to delete some posts.

We have been stress and certainly will in the Future, Public Service, Civility, Rigour, Facts and Truth can be our standards of motivation, even if sometimes it means that we need to put our feet on the ground.

Thank you for this post Monotreme.

Monotreme – at 18:56

Snowy Owl: You’re welcome.

A search for truth should always be our mission. And if we find people with power and reputation who violate basic ethical rules, we should say so. I will.

Melanie – at 18:58

Snowy, ‘treme,

Let’s go for the truth. The rest will take care of itself.

Monotreme – at 19:05

Melanie: People respect Dr. Gerberding. This is why reporters don’t question her decisions. Without pressure from the press, she will never agree to release the sequences. Reporters need to know that Dr. Gerberding is behaving in a grossly unethcial way and that her lack of ethics puts our lives at risk.

I don’t respect Dr. Gerberding. I want everyone to know this. I say this under my real name as well. More scientists need to stand up and denounce her despicable behaviour. Its the only we will know the truth about H5N1, in time.

Woodstock – at 19:11

Denouncing those that risk the lives of others is a duty i feel. Also hiding the truth for fear of panic is treating the general populace as infants. While it *may* cause panic, i dont see that as justification for hiding the truth. Panic may kill. Ignorance will without a doubt. Just my 2cents

Tom DVM – at 20:06

Monotreme. You choose the weapon and I am with you.

Allquietonthewesternfront – at 20:07

Monotreme - I have never noticed you name-calling. You have great courage and call a spade a spade and you lack the ego some scientists have in rich abundance. You have the moral turpitude to make that post, IMHO, and it is this kind of superb control over your reactions that make me take so seriously what you and a few others like NS1 have to say. I have praised you before and I am sorry if I come off a brown-noser but I have bragged many times to friends and family about both you and NS1. I highly value your science but value even more your obvious humanity and social skills. I wish I had that good of control. I snipped at poor Melanie twice. I know Dem has said we need thick skin around here but if some people dulled the barbs on their tongue (including me), not so many hides would get pierced. I know I will feel like a total idiot if I hit the post button and will probably turn back to reader for awhile but, sorry…just had to say it.

Allquietonthewesternfront – at 20:21

Oh my word! I typed fast and hit post before I could chicken out and the moment I hit the button I realized I had put the opposite word of what I meant. I just totally trashed Monotreme. Gee, maybe no one will notice. Or, maybe I’ll bann myself from posting for a month. Yeah, sounds good.

Kim – at 20:34

Scientists and/or physicians who withhold or distort information that could save lives, whose biggest concerns are playing politics and covering their asses????? Ohhhhh, surely not ;-) The fields of science and medicine are filled with these kinds of scumbags, and I consider them unethical, immoral, and just generally lower than whale poop at the bottom of the ocean. They are disgusting and should be exposed for the frauds that they are.

Monotreme – at 20:52

Thanks everyone for your kind words. Allquietonthewesternfront, don’t worry, I know what you meant.

Tom DVM, the press is the key, IMO. Whenever we get the chance, we need to make it clear to them that we do not respect Dr. Gerberding. Declan Butler’s piece, which I quoted from in my first post, was a great start, but we need more stories on this subject. There have been a few since then, but not enough.

We also need to talk to people at Meetings and point out to our fellow scientists, DVMs, physicians, etc, that Dr. Gerberding is engaging in scientific misconduct on an enormous scale.

Finally, US citizens, should call or write their representatives and demand that secret flu database at the CDC be released to GenBank so that all scientists in America and elsewhere can analyze them to help prepare us for a pandemic.

It would be tragic if the mistakes made by at the CDC in 2003/2004 with H3N2 were repeated with H5N1 in 2006.

Tom DVM – at 21:33

Monotreme. The net has many more than one fish in it. There are many other countries with more than one fish. In my opinion, there is a conspiracy of silence in agencies who have abbrogated their national authority to the WHO that is also playing the same game.

There was a direct misleading WHO statement in Jan. 2005, the data from which is still being used in Canada by our health regulatory authorities to downplay the issue…makes me wonder what the brain trust? has in mind to reduce panic when it happens.

The screen they conveniently hide behind, is confidentiality agreements. That is the heart of the matter. Get rid of these agreements and the problem is solved.

Their achilles heel….they are deathly afraid of public opinion challenging their god like status. Once the illusion of protection is exposed, they lose their power…just like the wizard of oz.

Tom DVM – at 21:42

Monotreme. The press is not the key. Flu Wiki is the key. Have you ever been in a regulatory agency office? They are all reading this. You don’t need to go to the press.

Think of Dr. Ian Douglas…now there is an ethical scientist with the ‘guts’ to clearly discuss the issue straight-up.

Where are the ethical scientists in these agencies who conveniently remain silent? If a few followed Dr. Douglas example, these problems wouldn’t happen in the first place.

DemFromCTat 22:06

I would respectfully submit that there’s a big difference between what you think of people, and how you can best persuade them to change their ways.

You can think whatever you want. What you need to consider is if name-calling will get you closer to changing behavior. Rarely will it, IMHO. And to suggest it is counter-productive is not to endorse the policies.

Tom DVM – at 22:15

DemFromCt.

I agree completely.

Winston Churchill was probably the best at it and did so with rhetoric rather than name calling.

However, you must place loyality where it is deserved…therefore, I defer to Monotreme (even though he might be more effective the other way). It is his call. If he wants to call them names than I am with him…no questions asked.

DemFromCTat 22:26

Monotreme works very hard at maintaining areas and posting on the wiki. That doesn’t make him right 100% of the time. And i can disagree with him without being disloyal. ;-)

Tom DVM – at 22:39

DemFromCt. I agree. I was speaking only for myself. I think of pathogen fighting in a sense as a war on terrorism. You have to pick your friends and trust them implicitly in battle. I’ll go down the alley with Monotreme and most of my other learned colleagues on flu wiki any day.

I have also known many regulators, most were doctors of one sort or another. I wouldn’t walk two inches with most of them because, in my opinion, they are unethical. I wouldn’t go into battle with unethical professionals because in the end they would be ‘preaching from on high’ about how good a job they did and I would be dead….like the revisionist history on SARS in Canada.

My personal choice is to allow Monotreme to choose the weapon of choice in the battle.

L120 – at 22:41

NATURE wants $30 to see the article, money I would rather spend on other stuff (pays for a lot of Ramen). What is the publication date so I can look it up in the local library when I get back home from vacation?

02 April 2006

Monotreme – at 10:27

DemFromCT: It is certainly OK for you or anyone else to disagree with me. In my first post, I was laying out why I believe what I do because I wanted to make it clear that simply disagreement is *not* cause for name calling. Violation of basic ethics is, IMO. As far as persuasion goes, if you think you are dealing with a sociopath, as I believe we are with Dr. Gerberding, no amount of polite pleading will ever convince her to release the CDC sequences. Such pleading on the part of NIH scientists has been going on for years, with no effect.

As I’ve said before, I added her to my list of “worms” because I want to make it clear that I don’t respect her. My hope is, if enough people do that she will either be forced by her superiors to release the sequences, which will certainly occur against her will, or she will be fired. I could be wrong about this. However, I’m pretty sure I’ve got the facts right about what happened in 2003/2004. In any case, I will never claim to be 100% correct on anything and am always eager to be corrected when I get my facts wrong. However, it appears that we disagree on strategy, not the facts.

Tom DVM: Thanks for your support. You’re right about other countries having problems with their regulatory agencies as well. I’m focusing on the CDC because it has alot of valuable sequences locked up, but pushing for transparency at all of these agencies should be something push for at all times, not just for a flu pandemic.

Monotreme – at 10:30

L120: Here is the citation for the Nature article:

22 September 2005, Vol 437, pages 458–459. “Flu researchers slam US agency for hoarding data”, by Declan Butler.

Lily – at 12:46

I think there is a difference between scientists and laypeople like myself. If I say anything, very few will take notice if any at all. If a scientist takes an it can’t happen stance, it is somewhat different, because people are trusting their judgement calls. I personally am leaning towards it may well not happen, where before I felt pretty sure it could well be inevitable. But who cares. Noone. I think anyone in the scientific community must be careful how they approach this. I can waver back and forth, noones atitude will change. If I were qualified I would be a great deal more hesitant to waver, but I feel they owe it to humanity to be as transparent about their data. It is not theirs. They do have a responsability to mankind as a whole.It boils down to personal ethical standards. If they seem to be oblivious to such standards, they need that extra push to force the issue. If they are indifferent to such pressure, there is little that can be done. A career is built on many little blocks, and trust is one of those blocks. If trust is taken away, the whole personal ediface of these peoples public persona is altered. A moral dilema worthy of a play by George Bernard Shaw.

27 May 2006

BroncoBillat 00:14

Older thread, closing for speed purposes.

check dates

Retrieved from http://www.fluwikie2.com/index.php?n=Forum.NameCallingOrHowToDealWithPeopleYouDonTAgreeWith
Page last modified on May 27, 2006, at 12:14 AM