RoyBoy, forget Alienus, forget Rosenberg.  This is about whether there was an NCI conspiracy (or whatever you'd prefer to label it) that would cause the findings of the 2003 expert workshop to be suspect.  You start out claiming that you never thought nor claimed there was pro-abortion bias.  If that's truly the case, I'd be happy to leave it at that.  You end, however, by suggesting, yet again, there was a 2003 conspiracy, or if you like, politically motivated bias (over all of the 100+ experts except Brind).  This would again be fine because, as shown above, it clearly was politically charged from the anti-abortion side.  Then you try to take a swipe at the source that you had praised (but apparently didn’t bother to actually read) and that is written by a PhD in a University history department and is published on PubMed Central (nih.gov) even as anti-abortion politicians dominate every part of U.S. politics.  You expect us to take your OR over a clearly more credible source?  This is why I stated before I think you’ve lost yourself in this article.  Whether intentional or not, you’re still essentially serving as Brind’s PR person.  Again, forget Rosenberg.  That's purely historical context that shows the one thing that you clearly agree with – it upset Brind.