Yeah, Right, Whatever

Recently, a study came out that said that fetuses do not feel pain until the third trimester. That seemed so cut and dry (and not what I remember hearing in earlier studies) that I got the impression that something smelled... fishy...

Come to find out (first by listening to Laura Ingraham today, then checking into it a little more), I was right.

But their seven-page article has a weakness: It does not mention that one author is an abortion clinic director, while the lead author - Susan J. Lee, a medical student - once worked for NARAL Pro-Choice America.

JAMA editor-in-chief Catherine D. DeAngelis said she was unaware of this, and acknowledged it might create an appearance of bias that could hurt the journal's credibility. "This is the first I've heard about it," she said. "We ask them to reveal any conflict of interest. I would have published" the disclosure if it had been made.

UCSF obstetrician-gynecologist Eleanor A. Drey, medical director of the abortion clinic at San Francisco General Hospital, said: "We thought it was critical to include an expert in abortion among the authors. I think my presence... should not serve to politicize a scholarly report."

Hmmm... so the researchers did not think that being the director of an abortion clinic who could benefit from this research's "findings" constituted a conflict of interest? It doesn't "politicize a scholarly report"? If a tobacco company pays for research, it's automatically suspect. If a pharmacutical company pays for outside research, it's suspect. If a chemical company pays for research, it's suspect. If a group wanting to prevent doctors from having to explain to their patients that their baby might just be in pain as the doctor sucks it out of her womb stacks the deck with people who provide and promote abortions, I think that's just a little suspect.

But I'm just cynical that way.