But Yale appears to be keeping at least a couple of candles lit, to judge from the response of the dean of the School of Public Health to heretical statements by its epidemiologist Harvey Risch about the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine:
“A bureaucracy that’s in bed with other forces that are causing them to make decisions that are not based on the science — that is killing Americans.”
Back in July, Sten H. Vermund, the dean of the Yale School of Public Health, defended Risch from criticism for findings that don’t correspond to mainstream opinion. “I have championed maintaining open academic discourse, including what some may view as unpopular voices. The tradition of academia is that faculty may do research, interpret their work, and disseminate their findings.”
“If persons disagree with Dr. Risch’s review of the literature, it would be advisable to disseminate the alternative scientific interpretations, perhaps through letters or other publications with alternative viewpoints to the American Journal of Epidemiology, Newsweek, or other outlets,” he added. “My role as Dean is not to suppress the work of the faculty, but rather, to support the academic freedom of our faculty, whether it is in the mainstream of thinking or is contrarian.”
4 comments:
"the voice of one crying in the wilderness"
How refreshing!
This morning I was reading about an archaeology paper (China) that proposed a very unusual hypothesis. Other archaeologists disagreed, and are now out scouring the region for more evidence one way or the other. That's how it should be. Propose an idea, show the data and how you reached your conclusion, and let other people try to disprove you with data.
LittleRed1
I think this is the link to the article cited.
Interesting, and encouraging.
I left out the link! Sorry about that.
Post a Comment