From: russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence)
Subject: Re: Retraction Honesty?
Organization: WP Group
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 21:01:42 GMT

From article <1993Jan27.165240.3780@samba.oit.unc.edu>, by itsmine@med.unc.edu (Greg Popken):
> In article <C1G8n8.Hqw@wpg.com> russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence) writes:
>>Several points:
>>
>>-- Are you certain that the allegation re: cat screaming was based solely
>>   on a single letter?  If it is, then I would agree that apologies are
>>   in order, but I suspect that the Times-Picayune newspaper will play
>>   one or two more cards before the game is officially closed.  They, too,
>>   made these same claims.
> 
> Based on the laetter from an AR advocate that got her information from a
> magazine.  Spare me Russ.

Perhaps.   I'm hoping that we'll hear some additional testimony from
bystanders that will disprove the statements made in the Sixty Minutes
report.  All I can say at the present time is that the woman in the
Sixty Minutes report worked in the office immediately adjacent to 
Carey's lab, and _not_ in an adjacent building as someone else posted
previously.

>>-- Are you certain that PETA members were responsible for the alleged
>>   threats and phone calls?
> 
> Yea!  The said my name is Joe Smith, PETA member, your husbands a dead
> man.  
> I'm tired of this arguement Russell!  No you can't prove that the people
> were PETA members.  But, the are definately AR advocates and probably
> support the views of PETA.  Regardless they are of the AR sect.

How do you know?

>>-- Criticism of the doctor's work went far beyond the issue of cat 
>>   screams.  Congressman Livingston, for instance, was concerned that
>>   the project was a waste of government resources. 
> 
> Sen. Livingston was concerned about votes.  If he thought the project was
> a waste of funds why the did he fund it in the first place?

You don't know Livingston very well.  I'm going to post a 
statement from him later in the day.  

> 
>>   Such criticism
>>   still stands, regardless of the self-serving flak cooked up by the
>>   AMA and served by Sixty Minutes.
> 
> Or the five neurologist, huh?

Have you read the GAO's report?

>>-- A local attorney, Jeff Sevy, filed an FOIA request for a copy of
>>   Carey's proposal when details of the project first leaked out of LSU.  
>>   Unfortunately, Carey had deleted large sections of the document 
>>   because they were alledgedly "proprietary".  Why would a "good 
>>   doctor" hide his work from public view, given the fact that he's 
>>   received two million bucks from the taxpayers to support his
>>   research?
> 
> It is common practice to block out certain information.  Research is a
> highly competitive buisness (one of may quality control measures).   Would
> you expect Nexus to disclose their shampoo formula or Boeing to to
> disclose their new plane designs?

Nexus and Boeing are private corporations.   Carey was working for
a state-supported school using federal money, and he was allegedly
working on a project that was humanitarian in nature.  What's the
purpose of secrecy in such a case?   To hide the humanitarian methods
and findings, perhaps?

-- 
Russell Lawrence, WP Group, New Orleans (504) 443-5000
russ@wpg.com   uunet!wpg!russ
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals