Politics Over Science: The Abstinence Push genre: Little Red Ribbon-Hood & Polispeak
An email from the office of an Indiana congressman to the Department of Health and Human Services prompted the Center for Disease Control to alter the previously peer reviewed panel for an upcoming conference on sexually transmitted diseases (STD's). Those bumped from the panel were astounded at the actions. Read the full article here and more from Slate here.
Bruce Trigg of the New Mexico Department of Public Health, the original organizer, condemned the decision as political meddling in the scientific process. The original panel was vetted through a formal peer-review process by independent researchers.
"It is unprecedented that this type of interference takes place at a scientific meeting," Trigg said. He said the original panel was not designed to be a balanced critique but to present the public health concerns about abstinence programs.
"I have nothing to fear from a balanced program. They would have been welcome to submit abstracts for review and consideration. The claim is this is about a public health program when it's really about ideology and religion," Trigg said.
Jonathan Zenilman, president of the American Sexually Transmitted Diseases Association, a co-sponsor of the conference, said he was "surprised and astounded."
"This is the first time I've seen the process of peer review subverted by pure politics," Smith said.
There is an increasing effort by abstinence only proponents to use political pressure to subvert the scientific process. One glaring example has been the delays in the approval process at the FDA for the Plan B contraceptive drug. Under Lester Crawford, former head of the agency, the process was repeatedly delayed despite receiving the necessary comittee approval recommendations. The upcoming approval for a vaccine to protect women from cervical cancer caused by HPV is expected to receive similar opposition from those who feel the vaccination will encourage sexual activity in young women.
Daniel DiRito | May 9, 2006 | 7:49 AM
Post a comment