As a fellow scientist, I support what the organization did.

We are scientists, and I don’t want to go to a real scientific conference (this is a medicine conference after all, not some circle jerk social sciences meeting, where all need to state at every opportunity they are against the Bad Orange Men, or risk losing all funding) and have these political stunts forcing some group thinking.

If they really wanted to distribute political opinion pieces, they would do it outside the premises at the entrance to the building. But not, they felt they had to shove it down everyone’s throats while others were trying to work.

▲

JumpCrisscross an hour ago | parent | next [-]

> they would do it outside the premises at the entrance to the building

If they were distributing fliers, sure. They weren’t. They were distributing an article published in the conference organizer’s own journal. That’s what academics do at conferences!

> risk losing all funding

They’ve already lost the funding. That’s what is being pointed out. OMB is using accounting shenanigans to circumvent the will of the Congress to cut funding to diabetes research, including, based on the article, some pretty serious and nonpartisan stuff.

▲

mbmbn 23 minutes ago | parent [-]

They were actually distributing an opinion piece titled “Misguided Brushes of a Pen Continue to Dismantle and Destroy Biomedical Research in the United States: We Can No Longer Afford Complacency and Fear. We Must All Act Now!”

They weren’t distributing a scientific article.

Link: https://diabetesjournals.org/care/article/49/6/901/164764/Mi...

	▲	JumpCrisscross 12 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		It’s an editorial published in the journal of the conference organizer. Calling it an “opinion piece” is incorrect—the journal is still publishing it as part of its proceedings. Astronomical journals frequently have articles going through the economics of various telescope proposals. The analogy would be someone in management at one of those conferences with an economic stake in one of the telescopes forbidding that team from distributing its work while others continue to do so. It’s obviously a breach of any reasonable code of conduct. It’s obviously a departure from precedent. And it would make anyone outside that conference really curious about the specific allegations raised in the quashed paper.

▲

0x696C6961 an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

You need funding to do science big guy.

▲

noelsusman 2 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

[dead]