Ethics in research. Area of research Treatment of Data Treatment of subjects –Humans –Animals.

Ethics in research

• Area of research

• Treatment of Data

• Treatment of subjects– Humans– Animals

Area of Research?

Treatment of Data

• Data grooming

• Data fudging

• Fraud

Fraud

Fraud

• School fires stem cell fraud scientist(AP)

• Disgraced cloning scientist Hwang Woo-suk • was fired Monday as professor of Seoul National

University over his stem cell fraud. •

Fraud

• Six other professors who worked on Hwang's project were either suspended for months or had their salaries cut, the school said.

• Last month, the school suspended Hwang from teaching and conducting research as an interim disciplinary measure, but he had remained a professor.

• Hwang's reputation as a pioneer in stem cell research was shattered when the university concluded in January that his claims of research breakthroughs were fake.

Fraud• Fraud in Drug Research• Corporate Crime in the Pharmaceutical Industry is a book by Dr

John Braithwaite

• he describes many examples of corporate crime in the pharmaceutical industry.

• extensive international research and includes interviews with 131 senior executives of pharmaceutical companies in the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, Mexico and Guatemala.

• "Data fabrication is so widespread", says Dr Braithwaite, "that it is called 'making' in the Japanese pharmaceutical industry, 'graphiting' or 'dry labelling' in the United States." He further states: "Pharmaceutical companies face great temptations to mislead health authorities about the safety of their products. It is a make or break industry -

Pharmaceutical fraud

• In his book Dr. Braithwaite reports that between 1977 and 1980 the United States Food and Drug Administration discovered 62 doctors who had submitted manipulated or downright falsified clinical data.

• A separate study conducted by the FDA has revealed that one in five doctors investigated, who carry out field research of new drugs, had invented the data they sent to the drug companies, and pocketed the fees.

Poehlman's Fraud

Poehlman's• Poehlman reacted strangely when his assistant turned in his

analysis of test results on about 150 women after menopause.

• Contrary to Poehlman's expectation that the women's health would broadly decline, some women actually saw improvements in their cholesterol levels and blood pressure.

• Poehlman took a computer disk of the data home for the weekend, ostensibly to look for clerical errors and statistical anomalies, and when he gave it back to DeNino for reanalysis, the data painted a much darker picture of post-menopausal health.

• At first, his assistant assumed he had made the mistake. But when he compared the original data against the revised data from Poehlman, he could see that, in women who seemed to be getting healthier over time, Poehlman had reversed the order of test results, making it appear that cholesterol levels and blood pressure readings had gotten worse, not better.

Poehlman's Fraud

• Researcher admits fraud in grant data

• March 18, 2005

• ''Some of his work was pretty influential," particularly on the physical decline that comes with aging, she said.

Poehlman's fraud• Poehlman's is the most serious case of research fraud since a mid-1980s

investigation led to an admission from University of Pittsburgh psychologist Stephen Breuning that he had falsified data on the use of stimulants in children,

• . Breuning was sentenced to 60 days in prison.

• Serious research fraud is exceedingly rare, • although cases serious enough to warrant barring a researcher from

receiving federal funds for a while come up several times a year.

Fraud

• Motivations for fudge and Fraud?– Axioms of belief– Prestige/fame– Money?– Grant support?

Getting grants

• Application

• Review

• Funding…who gets the money?

• Negative results?...the “needle in the haystack.”

Treatment of Human Subjects

• Nuremburg war crimes and trial

• Nuremburg Code

The Nuremburg Code of ethics• The Nuremberg Code• The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. • This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so

situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, over-reaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved, as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision. This latter element requires that, before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject, there should be made known to him the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards reasonably to be expected; and the effects upon his health or person, which may possibly come from his participation in the experiment.

• The duty and responsibility for ascertaining the quality of the consent rests upon each individual who initiates, directs or engages in the experiment. It is a personal duty and responsibility which may not be delegated to another with impunity.

• The experiment should be such as to yield fruitful results for the good of society, unprocurable by other methods or means of study, and not random and unnecessary in nature.

• The experiment should be so designed and based on the results of animal experimentation and a knowledge of the natural history of the disease or other problem under study, that the anticipated results will justify the performance of the experiment.

• The experiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury.

• No experiment should be conducted, where there is an a priori reason to believe that death or disabling injury will occur; except, perhaps, in those experiments where the experimental physicians also serve as subjects.

Nuremberg code cont’• The degree of risk to be taken should never exceed that determined by the

humanitarian importance of the problem to be solved by the experiment. • Proper preparations should be made and adequate facilities provided to

protect the experimental subject against even remote possibilities of injury, disability, or death.

• The experiment should be conducted only by scientifically qualified persons. The highest degree of skill and care should be required through all stages of the experiment of those who conduct or engage in the experiment.

• During the course of the experiment, the human subject should be at liberty to bring the experiment to an end, if he has reached the physical or mental state, where continuation of the experiment seemed to him to be impossible.

• During the course of the experiment, the scientist in charge must be prepared to terminate the experiment at any stage, if he has probable cause to believe, in the exercise of the good faith, superior skill and careful judgement required of him, that a continuation of the experiment is likely to result in injury, disability, or death to the experimental subject.

• "Trials of War Criminals before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals under Control

Atrocities have occurred in our country too: Tuskegee Syphilis Experiments

Tuskegee• The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment• For forty years starting in 1932, the U.S. Public Health Service (PHS) conducted an

experiment on 399 black men in the late stages of syphilis. These men were mostly illiterate sharecroppers from one of the poorest counties in Alabama, and were never told what disease they were suffering from. They were instead Informed that they were being treated for "bad blood." Their doctors did not intend to cure them of syphilis at all. The data for the experiment were supposed to be collected from autopsies of the men, and they were thus deliberately left to suffer the miseries of syphilis-which can include tumors, heart disease, paralysis, blindness, insanity, and death. When these facts become known in 1972, detailed inquires were made into the motivations of the experiment. Several reasons emerged. First, early in the study there existed a clear need for establishing blood tests for syphilis and for characterizing a control group. Second, after penicillin was discovered the researchers wanted to preserve an untreated group for long-term study in a society in which most infected people would receive treatment quickly. The Tuskegee experiment left deep scars among African Americans in the South. Much skepticism exists toward current programs connected with AIDS, for example.

• Were the intentions behind the Tuskegee experiment valid? • What role do you think racial attitudes toward African-Americans played?

CIA studies of LSD Effects

Unethical CIA experiments

CIA cont

Declassified: National Institutes of Mental Health "Addiction Research"

Dated 14 July 1954, this document outlines CIA experiments in tolerance to LSD at the Addiction Research Center in Lexington, Kentucky "Our experiments on tolerance to LSD-25 have been proceeding well, although I continue to be somewhat surprised by the results, which to me are the most amazing demonstration of drug tolerance I have ever seen. I have seven patients who have now been taking the drug for more than forty two days. One of these patients receives 1 mcgm./kg. daily, four receive 1.5 mcgm/kg. daily, and two receive 2 mcgm/kg. daily. All seven are quite tolerant to both the physiological and mental effects of the drug. We have attempted to break through this tolerance by administering double, triple and quadruple doses..."

CIA cont’

Declassified: "Eyes Only"CIA director Richard Helms told Congress the American public would have to take it on faith that the Agency would never use uninformed Americans as guinea pigs in drug tests. This three page memo from Helms, dated 17 December 1963, plainly contradicts that, spelling out in cold terms his approval of such programs, as implemented by the Bureau of Narcotics.

"Most of our difficulty stems from the fact that the individuals subjected to testing must be unwitting... In the circumstances of potential operational use of this technique, it is virtually certain that the target will be unwitting. Any testing program which does not attempt to approximate this real situation will result in a false sense of accomplishment and readiness... It goes without saying that whatever testing arrangement we adopt must afford maximum safeguards for the protection of the Agency's role in this activity... In considering possible alternatives to our present arrangement with the Bureau of Narcotics, we have considered contact with... police departments and prisons or prison hospitals. We have attempted several times in the past ten years to establish a testing program in an overseas setting, using indigenous subjects. In every case the necessity of making foreign nationals aware of our role in this very sensitive activity has made such options undesirable on security grounds... While I share your uneasiness for any program which intrudes on an individual's private and legal prerogatives, I believe it is necessary that the Agency maintain a central role in this activity, keep current on enemy capabilities in the manipulation of human behavior, and maintain an offensive capability. I therefore recommend your approval for continuation of this testing program with the Bureau of Narcotics."

CIA cont’

• "Use of LSD" memo• This memo, dated 1 December 1953, would

seem to be something of a clampdown on LSD testing within the Agency, following the Thanksgiving Day death of Dr. Frank Olson, an army scientist despondent in the weeks following his being dosed by Sidney Gottlieb. It notes the location of all known LSD stocks, including those given to George Hunter White.

Psychological Experiments in the early 1960’s lead to the APA code of ethics

• Extends the Nuremberg code to include concerns for psychological distress

• Examples: Milgrams studies

» Zimbardos’ studies

Migrams’ Obedience to authority Experiment

Obedience cont’

– Voltage confederate response – 75 grunts – 120 shouts in pain – 150 says that he refuses to continue

with this experiment – 200 blood-curdling screams 300

refuses to answer, mumbles something about a

heart condition – +330 silence

Obedience cont’

Obedience cont’

Milgrams’ Obedience study• An issue raised shortly after Milgram's explosion of fame was

whether it was ethical to conduct such deceptive and distressing psychology experiments. Although most of the participants in Milgram's original experiment were very pleased to have participated in such an unforgettable learning experience, one of them was forever traumatized and had great difficulty continuing with his life. Regulations have now been introduced to prevent such psychogical casualties; most notably, the requirement of informed consent, which demands that subjects be told what they will be doing before they actually do it. Whether Milgram's experiment was ethically justified is still the subject of heated debate today. On one hand, it seems inherently unethical. The world certainly learned a lot from it though. However, do the ends justify the means?

Phillip Zimbardo

Zimbardo Prison Exp

• In the prison-conscious autumn of 1971, when George Jackson was killed at San Quentin and Attica erupted in even more deadly rebellion and retribution, the Stanford Prison Experiment made news in a big way. It offered the world a videotaped demonstration of how ordinary people middle-class college students can do things they would have never believed they were capable of doing. It seemed to say, as Hannah Arendt said of Adolf Eichmann, that normal people can take ghastly actions.

Prison cont• On Sunday morning, Aug., 17, 1971, nine young men were

"arrested" in their homes by Palo Alto police. At least one of those arrested vividly remembers the shock of having his neighbors come out to watch the commotion as TV cameras recorded his hand-cuffing for the nightly news.

• The arrestees were among about 70 young men, mostly college students eager to earn $15 a day for two weeks, who volunteered as subjects for an experiment on prison life that had been advertised in the Palo Alto Times. After interviews and a battery of psychological tests, the two dozen judged to be the most normal, average and healthy were selected to participate, assigned randomly either to be guards or prisoners. Those who would be prisoners were booked at a real jail, then blindfolded and driven to campus where they were led into a makeshift prison in the basement of Jordan Hall.

Stanford Prison Exp

• The Stanford Prison Experiment: Still powerful after all these years

• I was sick to my stomach. When it's happening to you, it doesn't feel heroic; it feels real scary. It feels like you are a deviant.

• Professor Christina Maslach, UC-Berkeley, to psychologistsgathered in Toronto, Aug. 12, 1996

• The view through the doorway was too familiar like something she had seen in the international news sections of Life or Newsweek.

• Several young men dressed in khaki uniforms and wearing reflector sunglasses that hid their eyes were herding a larger group of men down a hallway. The latter were dressed in shapeless smocks that exposed their pale legs and the chains that bound one ankle of each man to another. Paper bag blindfolds covered their heads.

• Christina Maslach's stomach reacted first. She felt queasy and instinctively turned her head away. Her peers, other academic psychologists, noticed her flinch. "What's the matter?" they teased.

Zimbardo cont

• For Zimbardo, the prison experiment also has led to research on a range of social situations that generate pathological conditions. He has studied the social psychology of madness and cults, shyness as a kind of self-imposed prison, and time perspective the way people come to be controlled by their overuse of past, present or future timeframes.

Prison Experiment• Those assigned to be guards were given uniforms and instructed

that they were not to use violence but that their job was to maintain control of the prison.

• From the perspective of the researchers, the experiment became exciting on day two when the prisoners staged a revolt. Once the guards had crushed the rebellion, "they steadily increased their coercive aggression tactics, humiliation and dehumanization of the prisoners," Zimbardo recalls. "The staff had to frequently remind the guards to refrain from such tactics," he said, and the worst instances of abuse occurred in the middle of the night when the guards thought the staff was not watching. The guards' treatment of the prisoners such things as forcing them to clean out toilet bowls with their bare hands and act out degrading scenarios, or urging them to become snitches "resulted in extreme stress reactions that forced us to release five prisoners, one a day, prematurely."

http://www.prisonexp.org/

The APA code• ETHICAL PRINCIPLES OF PSYCHOLOGISTS AND CODE OF CONDUCT• Effective date June 1, 2003.

Copyright © 2002 American Psychological Association. All rights reserved. • TABLE OF CONTENTS • INTRODUCTION AND APPLICABILITY• PREAMBLE• GENERAL PRINCIPLES• Principle A: Beneficence and Nonmaleficence

Principle B: Fidelity and ResponsibilityPrinciple C: IntegrityPrinciple D: JusticePrinciple E: Respect for People's Rights and Dignity

• ETHICAL STANDARDS• 1. Resolving Ethical Issues• 1.01 Misuse of Psychologists' Work

1.02 Conflicts Between Ethics and Law, Regulations, or Other Governing Legal Authority1.03 Conflicts Between Ethics and Organizational Demands1.04 Informal Resolution of Ethical Violations1.05 Reporting Ethical Violations1.06 Cooperating With Ethics Committees1.07 Improper Complaints1.08 Unfair Discrimination Against Complainants and Respondents

• 2. Competence• 2.01 Boundaries of Competence

2.02 Providing Services in Emergencies2.03 Maintaining Competence2.04 Bases for Scientific and Professional Judgments2.05 Delegation of Work to Others2.06 Personal Problems and Conflicts

• 3. Human Relations• 3.01 Unfair Discrimination

3.02 Sexual Harassment3.03 Other Harassment3.04 Avoiding Harm3.05 Multiple Relationships3.06 Conflict of Interest3.07 Third-Party Requests for Services3.08 Exploitative Relationships3.09 Cooperation With Other Professionals3.10 Informed Consent3.11 Psychological Services Delivered To or Through Organizations3.12 Interruption of Psychological Services

APA code cont’• 4. Privacy And Confidentiality• 4.01 Maintaining Confidentiality

4.02 Discussing the Limits of Confidentiality4.03 Recording4.04 Minimizing Intrusions on Privacy4.05 Disclosures4.06 Consultations4.07 Use of Confidential Information for Didactic or Other Purposes

• 5. Advertising and Other Public Statements• 5.01 Avoidance of False or Deceptive Statements

5.02 Statements by Others5.03 Descriptions of Workshops and Non-Degree-Granting Educational Programs5.04 Media Presentations5.05 Testimonials5.06 In-Person Solicitation

• 6. Record Keeping and Fees• 6.01 Documentation of Professional and Scientific Work and Maintenance of Records

6.02 Maintenance, Dissemination, and Disposal of Confidential Records of Professional and Scientific Work6.03 Withholding Records for Nonpayment6.04 Fees and Financial Arrangements6.05 Barter With Clients/Patients6.06 Accuracy in Reports to Payors and Funding Sources6.07 Referrals and Fees

• 7. Education and Training• 7.01 Design of Education and Training Programs

7.02 Descriptions of Education and Training Programs7.03 Accuracy in Teaching7.04 Student Disclosure of Personal Information7.05 Mandatory Individual or Group Therapy7.06 Assessing Student and Supervisee Performance7.07 Sexual Relationships With Students and Supervisees

• 8. Research and Publication• 8.01 Institutional Approval

8.02 Informed Consent to Research8.03 Informed Consent for Recording Voices and Images in Research8.04 Client/Patient, Student, and Subordinate Research Participants8.05 Dispensing With Informed Consent for Research8.06 Offering Inducements for Research Participation8.07 Deception in Research8.08 Debriefing8.09 Humane Care and Use of Animals in Research8.10 Reporting Research Results8.11 Plagiarism8.12 Publication Credit8.13 Duplicate Publication of Data8.14 Sharing Research Data for Verification8.15 Reviewers

APA code cont’ 3• 4. Privacy And Confidentiality• 4.01 Maintaining Confidentiality

4.02 Discussing the Limits of Confidentiality4.03 Recording4.04 Minimizing Intrusions on Privacy4.05 Disclosures4.06 Consultations4.07 Use of Confidential Information for Didactic or Other Purposes

• 5. Advertising and Other Public Statements• 5.01 Avoidance of False or Deceptive Statements

5.02 Statements by Others5.03 Descriptions of Workshops and Non-Degree-Granting Educational Programs5.04 Media Presentations5.05 Testimonials5.06 In-Person Solicitation

• 6. Record Keeping and Fees• 6.01 Documentation of Professional and Scientific Work and Maintenance of Records

6.02 Maintenance, Dissemination, and Disposal of Confidential Records of Professional and Scientific Work6.03 Withholding Records for Nonpayment6.04 Fees and Financial Arrangements6.05 Barter With Clients/Patients6.06 Accuracy in Reports to Payors and Funding Sources6.07 Referrals and Fees

• 7. Education and Training• 7.01 Design of Education and Training Programs

7.02 Descriptions of Education and Training Programs7.03 Accuracy in Teaching7.04 Student Disclosure of Personal Information7.05 Mandatory Individual or Group Therapy7.06 Assessing Student and Supervisee Performance7.07 Sexual Relationships With Students and Supervisees

• 8. Research and Publication• 8.01 Institutional Approval

8.02 Informed Consent to Research8.03 Informed Consent for Recording Voices and Images in Research8.04 Client/Patient, Student, and Subordinate Research Participants8.05 Dispensing With Informed Consent for Research8.06 Offering Inducements for Research Participation8.07 Deception in Research8.08 Debriefing8.09 Humane Care and Use of Animals in Research8.10 Reporting Research Results8.11 Plagiarism8.12 Publication Credit8.13 Duplicate Publication of Data8.14 Sharing Research Data for Verification8.15 Reviewers

APA 4http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl

=http://www.ipjp.org/Old%2520Site/img13.gif&imgrefurl=http://www.ipjp.org/links.html&h=257&w=183&sz=27&tbnid=CQzIGuXbJ9sAFM:&tbnh=107&tbnw=76&hl=en&start

=1&prev=/images%3Fq%3DAPA%2Bethics%2Bguidelines%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26sa%3DX• 9. Assessment• 9.01 Bases for Assessments

9.02 Use of Assessments9.03 Informed Consent in Assessments9.04 Release of Test Data9.05 Test Construction9.06 Interpreting Assessment Results9.07 Assessment by Unqualified Persons9.08 Obsolete Tests and Outdated Test Results9.09 Test Scoring and Interpretation Services9.10 Explaining Assessment Results9.11. Maintaining Test Security

• 10. Therapy• 10.01 Informed Consent to Therapy

10.02 Therapy Involving Couples or Families10.03 Group Therapy10.04 Providing Therapy to Those Served by Others10.05 Sexual Intimacies With Current Therapy Clients/Patients10.06 Sexual Intimacies With Relatives or Significant Others of Current Therapy Clients/Patients10.07 Therapy With Former Sexual Partners10.08 Sexual Intimacies With Former Therapy Clients/Patients10.09 Interruption of Therapy10.10 Terminating Therapy

The IRB

• COPHS– Peers– Scientist– Non-scientist– Non institutional representation

– “COST-Benefit Analysis”– Steps taken to protect subjects

Use of animals in Research

• Why?– Important research where humans can not be

used– Computer simulations?– Dish studies?– Prisoner volunteers?– Needless replication?

ISSUES OF ANIMALS IN RESEARCH: PETA 1

• PETA believes that animals have rights and deserve to have their best interests taken into consideration, regardless of whether they are useful to humans. Like you, they are capable of suffering and have an interest in leading their own lives; therefore, they are not ours to use—for food, clothing, entertainment, experimentation, or any other reason.

• ALL ANIMALS ARE EQUALby PETER SINGER

• Ira. W. DeCamp Professor of Bioethics, University Center for Human Values, Princeton University

• • Excerpted from

Animal Rights and Human Obligations, New Jersey, 1989, pp. 148-162

• www.PeterSingerLinks.com

Peter Singer

The problems with Peta?• PETA's Dirty Secret

Hypocrisy is the mother of all credibility problems, and People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) has it in spades. While loudly complaining about the "unethical" treatment of animals by restaurant owners, grocers, farmers, scientists, anglers, and countless other Americans, the group has its own dirty little secret.

PETA kills animals. By the thousands.

From July 1998 through the end of 2005, PETA killed over 14,400 dogs, cats, and other "companion animals" -- at its Norfolk, Virginia headquarters. That's more than five defenseless animals every day. Not counting the dogs and cats PETA spayed and neutered, the group put to death over 90 percent of the animals it took in during 2005 alone. And its angel-of-death pattern shows no sign of changing.

YearReceived†AdoptedKilledTransferred% Killed% Adopted20052,1451461,9466990.76.820042,6403612,278186.313.720032,2243121,911185.914.020022,6803822,298285.714.320012,6857031,9441472.426.220002,6846242,0292875.623.219991,8053861,3289173.621.4* 199894313368512572.614.1Total17,8063,04714,41933180.117.1* figures represent the second half of 1998 only† other than spay/neuter animals» skeptical? click here to see the proof

• On June 15th, 2005 PETA employees Andrew Cook and Adria Hinkle were arrested for disposing 18 euthanized adult dogs and puppies in a dumpster behind a supermarket and for carrying 13 more dogs and kittens in their PETA van. The workers were arrested. All in all about 100 animals over a period of a month were suspected of being dumped by these employees.

Fellow PETA members were outraged. Those who were more involved with the group knew about the humane euthanasia training programs but they too were outraged and embarrassed by the actions of these two staff members.

Many animal lovers don't understand why PETA euthanizes animals to begin with but when they heard that PETA members dumped these dead animals in a dumpster the public went ballistic and started labeling PETA an undercover organization of animal murderers. As word spread it turned into a bad game of telephone. Facts either got misconstrued or the whole story wasn't given which blew the situation out of proportion and left PETA with an unfavorable impression to this day.

• RIVERTON, Utah -- An Animal Liberation Front (ALF) group attacked the home of a vivisector, apparently in April, according to an anonymous communique received by the North American Animal Liberation Press Office (NAALPO) on April 26.

According to the communique, activists attacked Audie Leventhal's home while it was vacant. It "was simply a recipe for easy direct action," reads the communique. The communique's author(s) claims that the group glued "every single lock on the house," "smashed out" the front window, and spray-painted slogans "all over his (Leventhal's) deluxe jacuzzi." In addition, the group poured a "salt-saturated solution all over his front lawn. This will kill the lawn and force Audie to lay down fresh soil. Not cheap."

The communique continues: "Total damages are estimated to be in the thousands of dollars. Audie is a ruthlessly violent alcoholic. This is a man who has sewn kittens' eyelids shut. This is a man who has experimented on conscious primates. This is a man who has beaten within inches of her life. Only a society corrupted by money and so unbelievably tolerant to the suffering of others would allow a man like this to still be free on the streets. The ALF does not share this corruption or tolerance. Audie can rest assured that we will be back."

Audie Leventhal is a professor of neurobiology at the University of Utah. He faced a domestic violence hearing in January. However, the author of the communique does not offer documentation of its allegations against the scientist.

Leventhal is one of the so-called "filthy four" University of Utah faculty members that a small animal rights group, Utah Primate Freedom (UPF), led by Jeremy Beckham, has targeted in protest of their allegedly cruel animal experimentation practices. (One of the four professors, Robert Donahoe, confirmed in a December e-mail to the group that he had stopped vivisecting monkeys and has since left the university. The other two targeted researchers as Alessandra Angelucci and Jennifer Ichida.)

• Animal Rights Criminal Pleads Guilty • Rodney Coronado is one of the more dangerous animal rights thugs in the country who was

previously imprisoned for committing arson "for the animals." Well, it looks like he is going to the hoosegow again, having entered into a plea bargain with prosecutors. From the story:

• A well-known animal rights activist pleaded guilty yesterday to a charge of showing people at a speech in San Diego four years ago how to make a destructive device with the goal of having someone commit a violent crime.

• Outside court, Singleton said Coronado accepted the deal to move on with his life and raise his family. Coronado already spent four years in federal prison for committing arson at animal research labs in Michigan.

• "I needed to do what is best for my family," Coronado, 41, said after he entered his guilty plea. He is free on bond until his sentencing in March. The rarely used federal law Coronado pleaded guilty to carries a maximum of 20 years in prison. But Coronado and the government have agreed to ask Judge Jeffrey Miller to impose a sentence of a year plus one day in federal prison, Singleton said.

• I'll bet he has been involved in far more than these charges would imply. But this is good news. Hopefully Coronado's love for his family and a second prison term will induce him to cease all criminality and encouragement thereof in the cause of animal liberation.

• Labels: Animal RIghts Terrorism, ghts Terrorism

• PETA, or People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, is the most well-known animal rights group in the world. For decades, PETA has labored for the well being and rights of animals, with an ultimate goal of "total animal liberation." Unfortunately for America, and the world, PETA has become something entirely un-American: a group dedicated to inflicting fear, terrorism, violence, and suffering upon humanity.

First, let's review what PETA means by "total animal liberation." PETA defines this as follows: No wearing of leather, fur, or any other animal product; no eating meat or drinking milk; no eating of eggs or honey; no zoos, circuses, 4H, or any other animal exhibition; no fishing or hunting; no medical testing of any kind upon animals, and no pets.

That's right. No Pets. What, you thought PETA only got angry at people wearing fur and leather? That's only a small part of what PETA does. Just imagine a world based on PETA's goal: There would be no farming of cattle or chickens, no meat, eggs, or honey in your grocery store. Millions of farmers around the world would lose their livelihoods, and a major part of the human food supply would be gone. Children, who need milk as a crucial part of their growth, would be crippled.

Anyone who likes to hunt or fish, whether for recreation or to obtain the furs, skins, and meat, would be a criminal. All leather, fur, and even silk would be banned. (PETA says it is cruel to use the silkworms to make silk.) The county fair will have no animals of any kind. 4H would have to close up shop. All zoos would have to close. Knut, the adorable polar bear cub in a German zoo, would have never been born, despite his entire species being in danger. All the species preservation and conservation work conducted and funded by zoos would end. Entire species that only exist in captivity would become extinct.

Peta?

• Recent NewsPETA Celeb Eats Fish: 'Nobody's Perfect' (4/24/06)In the past few weeks we've shared stories about the various celebrities promoted by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) who don't actually toe their radical animal-rights line -- including Oscar-winning actress Reese Witherspoon ("Everything's better with bacon!"), rap group Little Brother ("Meat... » read more

ALF

“The arbitrary Line”

• A cat is a rat is a pig is a boy

• Is a fish is a snail is a slug?

• Is a worm is a gnat is a mosquito? Etc…

• Philosophical consistency?

• What would it take?

PETH

• My story

Where to invest energy to help animals?

IRB

• IACUC

Ethics of Gossip?• Title:Do loose lips sink ships? The meaning, antecedents and consequences of rumour

and gossip in organisations.Author(s):Michelson, Grant, Work and Organisational Studies, School of Business, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, AustraliaMouly, V. Suchitra, Department of Management and Employment Relations, University of Auckland, Auckland, New ZealandSource:Corporate Communications, Vol 9(3), 2004. pp. 189-201.Journal URL: http://0-www.emeraldinsight.com.uncclc.coast.uncwil.edu:80/ccij.htm Publisher:United Kingdom: EmeraldPublisher URL: http://www.emeraldinsight.com ISSN:1356-3289 (Print)Language:EnglishKeywords:rumour; gossip; informal communication; organizationsAbstract:This paper examines an important, albeit neglected aspect of communication in the workplace, namely, rumour and gossip in organisations. Drawing on literature from multiple disciplines the paper provides an analysis of the role played by rumour and gossip within organisations, including, but not limited to, its meaning, hidden reasons and its management. The paper discusses both antecedent and outcome variables that are associated with organisational rumour and gossip. It is contended that the different types of rumour and gossip serve different purposes which, in turn, result in a range of outcomes. Moreover, and in spite of the tendency to ascribe rumour and gossip as morally reprehensible, not all of these outcomes are shown to be harmful within organisations. The authors use this finding to argue that scholars and managers alike should avoid making negative judgements about rumour and gossip in all such cases. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2006 APA, all rights reserved)(journal abstract)