Scientific Dishonesty complaint against Frisch et al. (2013)

Scientific Dishonesty

The above linked PDF is the actual complaint.

Find below my statement of interest to:

The Danish Committees on Scientific Dishonesty (Udvalgene vedrørende Videnskabelig Uredelighed [UVVU])

The Education and Research Ministry (Uddannelses- og Forskningsministeriet)

The scientific product for evaluation:

Frisch, et al. (2013). Cultural Bias in the AAP’s 2012 Technical Report and Policy Statement on Male Circumcision. Pediatrics, Volume 131, Number 4. URL <http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2013/03/12/peds.2012-2896.full.pdf+html>

Authors from Danish public institutions:

Morten Frisch, MD, PhD

Department of Epidemiology Research, Statens Serum Institut, Copenhagen and Center for Sexology Research, Department of Clinical Medicine, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark

Christian Graugaard, MD, PhD

Center for Sexology Research, Department of Clinical Medicine, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark

Gorm Greisen, MD, PhD

Department of Pediatrics, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark

Poul Jaszczak, MD, PhD

Ethics Committee of the Danish Medical Association, Copenhagen, Denmark

Niels Qvist, MD, PhD

Department of Surgery, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark

Other authors:

While a total of 38 authors are listed for this article, it appears that only those from Danish public institutions fall under the jurisdiction of the UVVU. However, all authors share responsibility for publication of the article, and therefore all should be judged to have engaged in scientific dishonesty. (This assumes that the UVVU doesn’t conclude that only the lack of a statement of Conflict of Interest by Dr. Frisch is a valid complaint.)

My interest:

I have a direct personal interest in this case, because I have published in the area of sexually transmitted diseases (Stodolsky, 1997). (Prepared with assistance by Dr. J. Hilden of the Dept. of Bio-statistics at Copenhagen University.) I have also made presentations in this area to the public via radio broadcast and Internet media (Stodolsky, 1989). Stodolsky and Zaharia (2009) evaluate system acceptability, and show how this approach can be extended to airborne and location-specific infectious agents. Finally, I have published a comment on research methodology in medicine (Stodolsky & Comins, 2000).

Furthermore, I am a member of the Danish Planned Parenthood Foundation (Sex og Samfund [SoS]). After I attempted to present a resolution on male circumcision (MC) at a recent annual general meeting (AGM) of SoS, I was publicly denounced by Dr. Frisch for daring to question “the child’s right to bodily integrity.” Additionally, the leadership of SoS has prevented me from fully presenting such resolutions at two consecutive AGMs by not putting them on the agenda. One explanation for this breakdown of democracy was that SoS had decided to promote a ban on male circumcision, based in part on Frisch et al. (2013). I was also banned from a discussion forum of another Danish NGO, due to my position on MC. Yet another Danish NGO failed to place my resolution on MC on their agenda as a direct result of the publication at issue in this case. Informed public discussion on this issue has been prevented by a one-sided opposition by Dr. Frisch and his compatriots (Stern, 2013).

As a member of SOS against Racism (SOS mod Racisme), I have an interest in promoting good relations among ethnic groups in Denmark. Comments by Frisch et al. have encouraged statements in the public debate, such as “Jews/Muslims mutilate children.” Dr. Frisch is apparently popular with Danish Nazis as a result of his work in this area:

http://blog.balder.org/?p=1268

While the Frisch et al. work may not be explicitly racist, it is, at best, an expression of cultural imperialism. The position has been termed unethical and immoral (Banerjee, et al. 2011).

Dr. Frisch has been urged by other researchers to not publish misleading results that contradict well established findings in this area (Morris & Krieger, 2013; Morris & Waskett, 2012). Unfortunately, he has chosen to disregard this advice. Therefore, it now becomes the responsibility of the UVVU to evaluate this scientific dishonesty. If Frisch et al. continue their campaign against male circumcision, it will contribute to 300,000 preventable deaths over the next 10 years (Williams et al., 2006).

References:

Banerjee J, Klausner JD, Halperin DT, Wamai R, Schoen EJ, Moses S, Morris BJ, Bailis SA, Venter F, Martinson N, Coates TJ, Gray G, Bowa K. 2011. Circumcision Denialism Unfounded and Unscientific. Am J Prev Med 2011;40(3)e11– e12.

Morris BJ, Krieger JN. Does male circumcision affect sexual function, sensitivity or satisfaction? ­ A systematic review. J Sex Med 2013;10:2644-57

Morris BJ, Waskett JH, Gray RH. Does sexual function survey in Denmark offer any support for male circumcision having an adverse effect? Int J Epidemiol 2012: 41: 310-312.

Stern, MJ. 2013, Sept. 18. How Circumcision Broke the Internet: A fringe group is drowning out any discussion of facts. Slate. URL <http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/medical_examiner/2013/09/intactivists_online_a_fringe_group_turned_the_internet_against_circumcision.html>

Stodolsky D. 1989, August 10. Personal Health Security System. Sci.med [Usenet]. Broadcast in part 1989, August 12 [Shortwave Radio]. Hilversum, The Netherlands: Radio Netherlands International, English Section.

Stodolsky, DS. 1997. Automation of Contagion Vigilance. Methods of Information in Medicine, 36(3), 220-232.

Stodolsky, DS & Comins, JD. 2000. Chiropractic patients more satisfied with chiropractic treatment. In British Medical Journal (Ed.), bmj.com eLetters for Vickers and Zollman, 319 (7218) 1176-1179. URL <http://www.bmj.com/rapid-response/2011/10/28/chiropractic-patients-more-satisfied-chiropractic-treatment>

Stodolsky, DS & Zaharia, CN. 2009. Acceptance of Virus Radar. The European Journal of ePractice, 8, 77-93. URL <http://epractice.eu/files/European%20Journal%20epractice%20Volume%208.7_1.pdf>

Williams BG, Lloyd-Smith JO, Gouws E, Hankins C, Getz WM, Hargrove J, de Zoysa I, Dye C, Auvert B. 2006. The potential impact of male circumcision on HIV in sub-Saharan Africa. PLoS Med 3:E262.

Cochrane vision undermined?

Email to the Cochrane Collaboration
----------------------------------------

Claire Allen,

The Cochrane vision statement:

http://www.cochrane.org/about-us

Our vision is a world of improved health where decisions about health and health care are informed by high-quality, relevant and up-to-date synthesised research evidence.

On 31 May 2013, Cochrane published the following summary:

http://summaries.cochrane.org/CD003362/HIV_male-circumcision-for-prevention-of-heterosexual-acquisition-of-hiv-in-men

Results from three large randomised controlled trials conducted in Africa have shown strong evidence that male circumcision prevents men in the general population from acquiring HIV from heterosexual sex.

Unfortunately, this Danish Statement on the Nordic Cochrane Center’s website doesn’t conform to this vision:

http://www.cochrane.dk./research/Goetzsche%20Hoering%20om%20omskaering.pdf

The Statement is a commented report of a hearing on a proposed ban on circumcision at the Danish Parliament. “Shah argued, on the other hand, strongly for the appropriateness of circumcision on the basis of the “wondrous evidence" that exists for its many medical benefits, however, there are actually none....” (Shah argumenterede derimod stærkt for berettigelsen af omskæring pga. den ”fantastiske evidens” der er for de mange medicinske fordele, men det er der jo netop ikke….). I identified five other misinformative sentences similar to this in the Statement. The author concludes by calling for a ban and by urging doctors to refuse to participate in the operation. He also includes the terms “mutilation (lemlæstelse)” and “barbaric (barbarisk)” to describe the medical procedure. Most of this Statement also appears as an article in the national newspaper Politiken on the 14. Nov. 2014. The author is identified as “Peter Gøtzsche, professor, dr.med., Det Nordiske Cochrane Center.”:

http://politiken.dk/debat/debatindlaeg/ECE2454003/laeger-boer-naegte-rituel-omskaering/

In 2007, an educational conference on male circumcision and HIV prevention, prepared by WHO, UNAIDS, UNICEF, UNFPA and The World Bank, was held at the Red Cross headquarters in Copenhagen. From the introductory information: “Male circumcision has now been assessed as a potential means to limit the spread of HIV.” The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria, The U.S. President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), The Clinton Foundation, and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation are among the donors of an effort to perform 20 million circumcisions in the high risk countries by the end of 2016. Last month, Gaven Yamey, MD, MPH, MA, MRCP(UK), from the University of California, San Francisco, was the keynote speaker at a public health meeting at the University of Copenhagen. He commented that male circumcision was the most important scientific advance of the last decade in the fight against AIDS.

I fail to see how the Cochrane vision is compatible with the cited Statement on the website of the Nordic Cochrane Center. Not only does it fail to cite the relevant findings of the Cochrane Collaboration, but it includes claims that are in contradiction to well known scientific findings. The public debate in Denmark has included the statements, “Jews/Muslims mutilate babies.” The language in the Statement appears to support such usage. Ethnic tensions have been escalating in Denmark as elections approach and this type of language will likely increase attacks. It appears that there has been a breakdown in presenting the research evidence on this issue. I hope the Cochrane Collaboration will ensure that such evidence is made available, even though I doubt whether this will be able to compensate for the damage done to the decision making process in Denmark and to the reputation of the Cochrane Collaboration.

Unfortunately, the damage resulting from this type of activity is not limited to Denmark. A male circumcision denialist movement, “Intactivists,” has emerged, which has many similarities to the once popular AIDS denialism movement. The organizations use emotional appeals, comics, and a movie is being made to promote their viewpoint. In Denmark, several NGO’s have been undermined, including the International Planned Parenthood Foundation affiliate “Sex og Samfund.” These organizations have ensured that public health professionals no longer participate in public discussion, since the professionals have learned that no amount of explanation has any effect on the fanatics’ behavior. Scientists that publish “incorrect” views have had their homes picketed. Meetings of foundations providing funding for circumcisions in high risk countries have been disrupted.  Denialism in the face of the ongoing pandemic has been declared unethical and immoral [Banerjee, et al. 2011. Circumcision Denialism Unfounded and Unscientific. Am J Prev Med 2011;40(3)e11– e12]. I presume that sharing responsibility for 300,000 preventable deaths over the next 10 years is something that the Cochrane Collaboration would prefer to avoid.

You can find a slide set supporting my arguments, a draft of a scientific dishonesty complaint,  etc. on this page:

http://cosmism.blogspot.dk/2013/11/male-circumcision-facts-myths-racism.html

Consensual Non-Monogamous (CNM) relationship satisfaction

Moreover, both qualitative and quantitative research have shown that participants in CNM relationships report high degrees of honesty, closeness, happiness, communication, and relationship satisfaction within their relationships (Barker, 2005; Bonello & Cross, 2010; Jenks, 1998; Klesse, 2006; LaSala, 2005).

Vidar Virus Radar

The Vidar Virus Radar page is available at this URL:

Vidar virus radar

Leso Case - Division 48 Open Letter to APA Ethics Office

Stephen Behnke, JD, PhD                                                                                April 2, 2014

Lindsay Childress-Beatty, JD, PhD

Ethics Office

American Psychological Association

Dear Drs. Behnke and Childress-Beatty:

On behalf of the Executive Committee of Division 48, the Society for the Study of Peace, Conflict and Violence, I write to express our deep concern and disappointment at the recent decision of the APA Ethics Office in the case of Dr. John Leso. Extensive evidence from authoritative sources documents his planning, presence, and active involvement in the brutal detention and interrogation – and ultimately torture – of Mohammed al-Qahtani at Guantanamo. Nearly seven years after the ethics complaint was filed against Dr. Leso, the Ethics Office closed the case without sanctions and without taking the case to the full Ethics Committee for review and resolution. As peace psychologists, we are unable to perceive a legitimate basis for either this procedure or outcome.

Division 48 is committed to restoring the moral integrity of American psychology and to ensuring that our professional organization provides exemplary leadership in all areas of peace and human rights. APA is responsible for fully and objectively investigating and adjudicating all formal ethics charges where there is compelling evidence of psychologist involvement in torture. The antithesis of healing, therapy, and the benevolent use of psychological knowledge and research, torture is the deliberate application of physical or psychological pain, and a cruel, inhuman, and degrading form of violence.

The Ethics Office’s decision to take this action and to deny the full Ethics Committee the opportunity to carefully and thoroughly review the evidence only increases the likelihood of future torture by psychologists. In cases like that of Dr. Leso, full Ethics Committee reviews are necessary to maintain a meaningful standard of professional ethics, to demonstrate and encourage compassion for the direct victims of brutality, and to provide unambiguous guidance and support to psychologists who will, quite possibly, face pressures to facilitate and legitimize torture in the future. Moreover, impunity for torture increases the probability that psychologists will be the indirect cause of other forms of interpersonal and intergroup violence in the world.

The Division 48 Executive Committee also shares the view expressed by Division 39 (Psychoanalysis) that the Leso decision is disturbing, on many counts, and potentially far-reaching in its adverse consequences on the ethics of our profession and on the stature of organized psychology in the United States. Any psychologist readily understands the need to maintain some level of confidentiality around the most sensitive information, but there appears to be no reasonable justification for diverting the Leso case from a full Ethics Committee review. We request much greater transparency regarding the basis by which APA staff, consultants, and the Ethics Committee Chair chose to close the case without a review by the full committee.

Sincerely,

Brad Olson, PhD

President, APA Division 48

cc: APA Board of Directors

How to Stop Extremism that Fueled Shooting

Norway’s Johan Galtung, Peace & Conflict Pioneer

So Breivik talks cultures where the Nazis talked race. But otherwise, the similarity is almost point to point.

When again you ask the question, "What does it remind you of?" there is a horrifying answer, which will be very difficult for Norway to process. This is exactly the ideology of the Washington-led attack on Muslim countries. There’s a civil war in Europe. It’s called "the clash of civilizations,".... The road is greased by failed states and by local groups taking command of those failed states, so that in these failed states, the local groups, be they Taliban, Hamas, Hezbollah, or al-Qaeda, these groups can launch decisive attacks on the Christian Western mainland, and particularly then the U.S. And 9/11 is then interpreted in that context. And point three, it makes no sense to have any dialogue. These people, you cannot talk with them. Terrible as it is, the only language they understand is violence. Well, my country, Norway, is a part of that: sharpshooters in Afghanistan killing Taliban.

Male Circumcision: Facts, Myths, Racism

Presentation abstract

Three major areas related to male circumcision are covered: facts, myths, and racism. The factual material includes activities of health organizations,  the costs and benefits of circumcision as a preventative health intervention, and the legal status of male circumcision. We first review the statements and programs of major international health organizations. Next, we present the scientific findings on the risks and benefits of male circumcision. Findings related to male and female sexual satisfaction after circumcision are also presented. Finally, we review the status of male circumcision under human rights law.

Male circumcision is the subject of widespread myths. First, we consider positions of various organizations and of "European doctors" on male circumcision. Exaggeration of intervention risks and minimization of disease prevention effects by opponents are discussed. Information that confuses the public about the effects of circumcision on disease incidence and sexual satisfaction is analyzed. We show that the "right to bodily integrity" is not a valid objection to male circumcision. 

Finally, we review the material disseminated by "Intactivists" and examine the effect of proposed bans to clarify the racist impact of the opposition campaign. We show how this position has the effect of promoting sexual dysfunction as well as discrimination against groups practicing circumcision. In the Nordic countries, new and proposed legislation regulating male circumcision most directly impacts Muslims.