11 comments

  • KnuthIsGod 30 minutes ago
    ".Some questioned how handing out reprints of an editorial published in the ADA’s own journal, at the ADA’s own annual conference, could be construed as a violation of that code.."

    The God Emperor is not to be questioned.

  • mcswell 2 minutes ago
    I'm hoping the Streisand Effect will take hold, and this editorial becomes the most read article ever of that journal. I've posted this news on my FB (yes...) page. And I downloaded a PDF, in case the journal takes the editorial down.
  • jfengel 1 hour ago
    Headline is weird. It's not a copyright thing, as I had assumed. It was because it was an editorial criticizing how the administration is running the NIH.
    • Terr_ 1 hour ago
      And not an arbitrary editorial, but:

      > > Some questioned how handing out reprints of an editorial published in the ADA’s own journal, at the ADA’s own annual conference, could be construed as a violation of that code.

    • bluGill 19 minutes ago
      Protesting is not allowed by the rules.

      Though there is a good case that breaking that rule is the best action. Getting kicked out probably did more for their cause then their protest. They just need the guts to publicly stand by.

    • Forgeties79 1 hour ago
      An editorial published in the (reputable) journal Diabetes Care, which they handed out at a diabetes conference. I imagine if it wasn’t critical of the administration they would not have been told to stop, but this is Louisiana so
  • nritchie 1 hour ago
    Science funding in the US is in crisis. We need to stand with those bold enough to point out that the emperor has no clothing.
    • netsharc 17 minutes ago
      The ending of that story is interesting:

      > The Emperor was vexed, for he knew that the people were right; but he thought the procession must go on now! And the lords of the bedchamber took greater pains than ever, to appear holding up a train, although, in reality, there was no train to hold.

      From https://americanliterature.com/author/hans-christian-anderse...

    • warumdarum 1 hour ago
      [flagged]
      • vjsrinivas 33 minutes ago
        Almost all of these don't apply to diabetes science. Its just the unfortunate nature of the average populace collapsing the complicated nature of scientific work and real human issues into problems that affect "science". Also, bad actors that want to twist the uncertainity of certain scientific areas into fake news.
      • nandomrumber 53 minutes ago
        > own downfall by tribalist regressors.

        As an outsider, it’s not clear to me who you are referring to as tribalist regressors here.

        Would you mind clarifying?

        • db48x 45 minutes ago
          He means people who supported Trump. It’s not a very accurate description of them, but he has a point otherwise.
      • gwerbin 54 minutes ago
        Are you talking about science, or politics? I don't think any of this applies to diabetes research.
        • oskarkk 39 minutes ago
          You're commenting under an article about politics, not about diabetes research.
      • watwut 57 minutes ago
        Nah. Science was not in such crises.

        It is literally people who want to deny uncomfortable realities that are attacking and destroying it now. The ideological anti reality issue is in the side of Trump voters.

        Also, funny enough, people who were correctly predicting what conservatives will do were called out of touch by people like you. Quite a few of them were actually social scientists and yes they have seen it.

        • nritchie 47 minutes ago
          Right, science, while not perfect (being a human endeavor), is our best mechanism for getting closer to the truth. Sure, fraud happens (occasionally). Not all "results" are a step forward. But the system is inherently self correcting. The problem is the politicization of science funding when scientific results don't fit into a dogma driven view of the world.
        • nandomrumber 49 minutes ago
          [flagged]
          • uniqueuid 41 minutes ago
            The causal loop you mentioned makes social science hard, but I’d argue that falsification and hypothesis-driven research can still work. Otherwise all the behavioral targeting Meta and Google and co are doing would not work.
          • nritchie 39 minutes ago
            I have no idea what you are babbling about. Sure, the evolution of the climate is recorded in the geological record. Climate scientists largely understand why these geological timescale events happened. What we are now undergoing is orders-of-magnitude faster than any geologically recorded event. Except for catastrophic events like meteorite impacts and mega-vulcanism there has never been such a rapid change. And climate scientists understand why. Look in the mirror. It is us.
  • hnarayanan 34 minutes ago
    I used to do this when I was in grad school as a matter of principle. F the man.
  • lucasRW 4 minutes ago
    Understandable, we've all been at events where some "dissidents" try to get their point across my aggressively following you, going to places they haven't been invited, etc, etc.
  • KnuthIsGod 35 minutes ago
    Tomorrow Robert Kennedy will announce that diabetes is fake news,does not exist and can become cured by taking ivermectin and avoiding seed oils and Tylenol....

    The next day Trump will have the 173rd Airborne kidnap the entire editorial board of the American Diabetic Association and will get them good plated with fake gilt from Temu.

    • officialchicken 28 minutes ago
      And the JDF already has the Diabetes Peace Prize Award ready to send to him asking for the shifting of all research funds into "awareness" marketing.
  • black_13 17 minutes ago
    [dead]
  • farcetrue2 39 minutes ago
    [flagged]
    • trumpdong 35 minutes ago
      You're using a throwaway account for a reason.
      • thereasoniis 33 minutes ago
        Because mods continually delete my accounts even in violation of their own terms of service.

        But don't engage with the bad wrong think, just flag it and move on! The censors would be proud of you all.

        • exe34 11 minutes ago
          eh, it's a private blog isn't it, they can set whatever terms they want and change their minds.
    • SirFatty 37 minutes ago
      Lighten up, Francis.
  • 100ms 25 minutes ago
    [flagged]
    • blitzar 18 minutes ago
      clearly offended "The Party"