From: russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence)
Subject: Re: animals in research
Organization: WP Group
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 03:04:51 GMT


Russell Lawrence writes:
rl> Do you understand the concept of "special pleading"?  [Let's
rl> suppose, just for the sake of argument, that every reporter who 
rl> was invited to the PCRM news conference had daily access to 
rl> usenet, and hence, would be exposed to a daily dose of articles
rl> from Rich Young.  In such a case, would it be unethical for Rich 
rl> Young to continue posting dietary and medical advice to usenet...
rl> just as you say that it's unethical for Neal Barnard to give press 
rl> conferences?]  

From article <1992Dec24.005756.11035@pixel.kodak.com>, by young@clpd.kodak.com (Rich Young):
ry> Oh, please.  Don't you understand the difference between Usenet and
ry> the New York Times?  

You edited out the text shown in brackets above.  I've edited the 
material back in.  Would you mind answering the questions posed 
therein?  

Meanwhile, I'll answer your question.  Yes, there are quite a few 
differences between the writers and readers of usenet, and the writers 
and readers of the New York Times.   Do you think the editors of the
NYT would be willing to re-publish the nutrition articles that 
you've posted on usenet?

Permit me to draw your attention to the following passage which you 
also edited from your reply.  

===================================================================
Without engaging in "special pleading", please explain why its 
ethically acceptable for the Dairy Board to hand out "educational" 
materials to naive elementary school children, yet ethically 
unacceptable for a group of licensed physicians to share their views 
on the hazards of milk consumption to a group of adult reporters who 
are used to the controversies of the adult world.  Is it reasonable 
for the government to make dairy products (the #2 source of fat 
calories in the typical US diet) the mainstay of food handouts for the 
poor...  given the fact that heart disease and stroke are the first and 
third ranked causes of death in the US?  
===================================================================

Would you mind commenting on the apparently contradiction between 
your harsh criticism of PCRM's press conference (involving adult 
reporters) versus your apparent complacency in accepting the Dairy 
Board's "education" campaigns involving very young children.  We 
know you can see a difference between the allegedly "critical" 
thinkers on usenet (hee hee) and the allegedly fuzzy-headed readers 
of the NY Times.  Can you see a difference between NYT reporters 
and millions upon millions of school children in the first and 
second grades?  

rl> No, I don't.  However, I do know that a three page article on dairy
rl> products that was recently published in PCRM's journal was accompanied
rl> by twenty-eight footnotes.  It would truly surprise me if PCRM had
rl> failed to hand out references at their recent press conference on
rl> milk.

ry> Didn't you just castigate Martin for jumping to conclusions without
ry> actually having the facts at hand?  Apparently you work in a "do as
ry> I say, not as I do" mode.

rl> I didn't jump to conclusions.  You asked me a question and I answered:
rl> "I don't know".   Does that sound like I was jumping to conclusions?

ry> "It would truly surprise me if..." is a conclusion: "They MUST
ry> have handed out references."

You're equivocating, Rich.  The statement, "I don't know", is amply
clear.  And the conditional tone of the phrase, "I would be truly 
surprised if..." is equally clear.  

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