> “They physically grabbed us, forced us out of the conference center, and now are telling us we can no longer attend this meeting,” Kelly told MedPage Today, which first reported the incident. “They’re taking our lanyards. It really has come to this in America. Censorship is real. America needs to stand up. Scientists, stand up. Physicians, stand up.”

It's become very evident from the outside that the best time to stand up was yesterday, and you might already be too far down the slope to be able to quickly recover for this. I really do feel for all Americans who just want to have a normal life with an average quality of life or above, but at one point the environment around you change so quickly that that stops being even a possibility in the future. If your life hasn't been affected yet, it will be shortly.

The best day to stand up against the ongoing censorship and repression might have been yesterday, but the second-best day to do so is today. You really need to start caring about this before it's way to late. One "no kings protest" every 6 months is not gonna do anything, what you need is wide solidarity across industries, and a real general strike across the country. The second you do this, you'll see that the many and poor can control the few and rich.

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.

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

".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.

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.

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.

I think you have to start from:

- the organizers are doing what they think is best for the attendees, and what the majority of attendees want

And, you should consider: "what if everyone did that?"

I gather they had a paper they thought was important, but was not accepted to the conference (so they had no formal chance to present it). What would happen if everyone who's paper was rejected could just wander around passing it out and pitching it to random passerby's? I think almost everyone who attends conferences would not want that.

I wonder what other options they considered. Did the conference have a less formal forum, like workshops or something? Could the topic be discussed there? A poster session?

I used to do this when I was in grad school as a matter of principle. F the man.

A reminder to anyone who finds themselves in this kind of situation, do not engage with the rhetoric of the enemy. You cannot win an argument where they set the rules. So here, where they question whether or not they were "protesting" distracts from the reality of a censorious organization that will weaponize regulations it controls without good faith. Instead you need a simple, memorable statement of condemnation which is repeated consistently and a clear action which those who hear it can take in response.

"This organization is controlled by Trump loyalists. They are not scientists. You do not owe them respect. Speak over them. Let no manipulation go unchallenged or derided."

undefined

Bhattacharya is an unlicensed MD and completely unfit to lead NIH

All this proves to me is the current US admin. is intent on turning China into the number 1 scientific research country.

At this rate, English could be replaced by Mandarin as the main international language of commerce. The only thing that could hold it back is the writing system.

If China could convert its writing to use the Latin alphabet I think that could happen with the US now on the path of destroying its research institutions.

> handing out copies of an editorial, published in the journal Diabetes Care on April 29, sharply criticizing the Trump administration’s ongoing attacks on scientific research.

Trump and his cronies try to repurpose everything they slurp up into a propaganda tool. Recently Hegseth babbled about how Europe will perish because of immigration. Today five people were evicted from a conference about science. Their crime? Not supporting Trump.

Something is fundamentally broken in the USA. It's like Neo-Russia, or rather handled like that by those cronies.

Took them long enough to finally object, as this is just the latest in a long line of attacks against science. Previously, scientists were forced to make an ideological oath to diversity to get hired [1,2], were hired primarily based on adherence to that ideology [3,4,5], were told by major scientific publications to avoid or simply not publish studies that might question that ideology [6,7], disavowed studies based solely on them being used to criticize favored causes [8], were prosecuted by the state (in Sweden) for true findings that harmed that ideology [9]. Papers were rejected if their results went against the liberal worldview, but methodologically-identical papers with pro-liberal results were accepted [10], and scientists were barred from accessing taxpayer-funded data if there was a risk their research might harm the dominant ideology [11].

[1] Required ‘diversity and inclusion’ statements amount to a political litmus test for hiring - https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-universitys-new-loyalty-oat...

[2] Diversity Statements Required for One-Fifth of Academic Jobs - https://www.schoolinfosystem.org/2021/11/11/study-diversity-...

[3] Berkeley Weeded Out Job Applicants Who Didn't Propose Specific Plans To Advance Diversity - https://reason.com/2020/02/03/university-of-california-diver...

[4] A recent report from the Goldwater Institute found that 80% of job postings for Arizona’s public universities required applicants to submit a statement detailing their commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion. - https://www.goldwaterinstitute.org/policy-report/the-new-loy...

[5] Mathematicians divided over faculty hiring practices that require proof of efforts to promote diversity - https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/01/mathematicians-divid...

[6] Science Must Not Be Used to Foster White Supremacy - https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/science-must-not-...

[7] Science must respect the dignity and rights of all humans - https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-022-01443-2

[8] I Cited Their Study, So They Disavowed It - https://www.wsj.com/articles/i-cited-their-study-so-they-dis...

[9] A Swedish professor proved that most rapes are committed by immigrants. The prosecutor's office took care of it - https://portal.research.lu.se/en/activities/a-swedish-profes...

[10] Human subjects review, personal values, and the regulation of social science research. - https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1986-12806-001

[11] The National Institutes of Health now blocks access to an important database if it thinks a scientist’s research may enter “forbidden” territory. - https://www.city-journal.org/nih-blocks-access-to-genetics-d...

Honorable mentions:

“If you write: ‘I believe that everyone should be treated equally,’ you will be branded as a right winger,” Vinod Aggarwal, the chair of Asian Studies at the university, said in an interview. - https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/08/us/ucla-dei-statement.htm...

UC Berkeley’s rubric for evaluating diversity statements penalized candidates for saying that they prefer to “treat everyone the same,” or for objecting to racially segregated affinity groups. As my reporting has shown, by the early 2020s, the Berkeley rubric had become something of a gold standard, used by search committees across the country, including at the University of New Mexico, University of South Carolina, Northwestern University, and Ohio State University. - https://www.city-journal.org/article/a-death-knell-for-diver...

https://www.nas.org/reports/diversity-statement-then-dossier...

https://www.wsj.com/articles/nih-national-institutes-health-...

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-nih-sacrifices-scientific-r...

https://www.wsj.com/articles/inside-ohio-states-dei-factory-...

[dead]

[flagged]

[flagged]

[flagged]

[flagged]

[flagged]

[flagged]

[flagged]

[flagged]

This is unacceptable, and it’s fascist behaviour.

These kind of behaviour should trigger the dismantling of the whole ADA organisation, then to be rebuilt on proper grounds.

As usual i’m not surprised these fascist behaviours (“you’d better align with us and publicly pledge allegiance to us or else”) comes from the left. They’re the real fascist.

I can totally understand that protesters get kicked out of a conference. Although there are ways to handle it professionally and non violently ofcourse

Find a public square, get a permit and you can rant all day about Jesus, Palestine or space lizards.

They were quietly, politely protesting, but protesting. If two identical conferences had a rule against protesting, but conference A had a plan to have zero tolerance for it, and conference B decided to play it by ear, evaluate based on the disruption and reasonableness and respond as the situation required ... I'd rather go to conference A. I'd feel the same way about a no smoking rule.