[Intl_DxMedPhys] Government, science, censorship

[Christina Brunnquell]

If the government is censoring scientific publications, how can we be sure
that “the return to xx/xy biology” is appropriate?

Thank you Bob for raising this issue as one worth encouraging GRAC and
other related AAPM committees to respond to. I will join you in that effort
alongside additional activism outside of this list and our professional
society at the encouragement of our colleague.

Christina

On Sat, Feb 8, 2025 at 9:52 AM Gary via Intl_dxmedphys_wd_osu_list <
intl_dxmedphys_wd_osu_list at lists.osu.edu> wrote:

> Here's a thought.  Everyone who is outraged at the return to xx/xy biology
> should consider a career change.  Maybe greater satisfaction is awaiting
> you in the exciting field of activism, or politics.  I think there is a
> super abundance of forums for just those topics.  But there are very few
> good forums for medical physics, and I hope everyone will agree that we
> should stick to physics to avoid ruining this wonderful resource.
>
>
> ---
> Thanks,
> Gary Isenhower
>
>
>
>
> On Sat, 8 Feb 2025 08:09:58 -0500, Bob Pizzutiello via
> Intl_dxmedphys_wd_osu_list <intl_dxmedphys_wd_osu_list at lists.osu.edu>
> wrote:
>
> >When politics gets the science wrong, how do responsible scientists
> >respond? I am raising a scientific issue of concern.
> >
> >One of the deeply troubling edicts of the current administration now
> >demands retraction of manuscripts in preparation/publication that use
> >any of the key words listed in the article below. In recent years
> >every hospital I know has been asking medical physicists to advise on
> >updating pregnancy policies to address the human and scientific
> >reality that the simple terms “male” and “female” do not represent all
> >patients. Science is what we do.
> >
> >20+ years ago our profession struggled when a California Law
> >pertaining to CT scanners included numerous errors that put compliance
> >in conflict with scientific fact.
> >
> >Perhaps some of our California colleagues would care to refresh our
> >collective memories about the complex challenges they encountered as
> >they fought for years to change the legislation to be less at
> >opposition with science.
> >
> >Of course, today’s situation is not based on and legislation.
> >
> >Finally, I offer my sincere concern to our colleagues at VA, FDA and
> >other government agencies who must now face the demand to remove those
> >terms while remaining true to the scientific reality that is not as
> >simple as binary. They may not choose to be identified, but I plan to
> >raise this concern with AAPM’s Government Affairs Committee.
> >
> >
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.medpagetoday.com/opinion/faustfiles/114043?xid=nl_mpt_DHE_2025-02-08&mh=cd63cfb826c6259b492e21ab9143b4a3&zdee=gAAAAABm4uQotrW8bAtCQc20dqv7I4FIVoNn-AjQzXpfT7y1hX3RdbBj0pWPFSXMZr70I1N9IwItsKCOPEDJuK5lBKxdutuJ8LQbsQZpQ3JAJoWoNI617-I*3D&utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Weekly*20Review*202025-02-08&utm_term=NL_DHE_Weekly_Active__;JSUl!!KGKeukY!0NuOcE-dyb2YN7RQZzdccCV8lgewnOvd9uF7eTzQRMajI4lBjJGw2yYT40EigeACFfPX2JcFKZ-m5jsUdRyYjrn-GSMmcORecAKmwfhO$
> >
> >We should probably focus any comments on the scientific and ethical
> >challenge at hand resulting from this anti-scientific censorship, and
> >resist blowing up this list with political rhetoric, no matter how
> >strongly held.
> >
> >Bob
> >From Bob Pizzutiello, via iPad
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.osu.edu/mailman/private/intl_dxmedphys_wd_osu_list/attachments/20250208/a3333fc6/attachment.html>