Monday, July 21, 2014

U bioethics professor Leigh Turner bashes the U's pretend review of psychiatric research

Read about it in City Pages.

If you've read Leigh's blog post and letter, you'll know the substance of his argument.  The City Pages reporter, Robbie Feinberg, asked both the U and AAHRPP for responses, and what he got is so mealy-mouthed and insubstantial that both responses are worth reproducing here.

From a "U of M spokesperson":

"From the start, our goal has been to ensure a vigorous process that fulfills the Faculty Senate's resolution to conduct a thorough, professional, independent and transparent review of our human subjects research practices. AAHRPP submitted the strongest proposal to administratively manage this process; it is not conducting any portion of the review. The review will be undertaken by a group of independent, internationally-recognized experts in the field of human subjects research protection. As part of this process, potential conflicts of interest will be managed appropriately."

From Elyse Summers, the President and CEO of AAHRPP:

"AAHRPP is proud to be a leader within the human research protections community. Consistent with that role, AAHRPP is well-positioned to have identified and assembled an independent panel of world renowned experts in the fields of bioethics, medicine, psychiatry, law and human research regulations, who, individually and collectively, have the experience, intellect, and integrity to conduct the evaluation requested by the University of Minnesota. AAHRPP will logistically manage the work but will play no role in the substantive analysis, decision-making, conclusions or recommendations of the expert team. As an organization committed to identifying and promoting the highest level of human research protections, we at AAHRPP are as eager as anyone to learn from the findings of the independent expert panel."

"World-renowned experts"?  Seriously?

A "thorough" and "transparent" review?  That is limited to three years, will cover no cases of research misconduct, and will not investigate Dan Markingson's suicide?

Come on.  Does anyone, anywhere, actually think that this review is legitimate?

No comments:

Post a Comment