[MemoryHoleHQ]

They weren't handing a paper published in the journal (which implies some kind of scientific paper); they were handing an opinion piece titled :Misguided Brushes of a Pen Continue to Dismantle and Destroy Biomedical Research in the United States: We Can No Longer Afford Complacency and Fear. We Must All Act Now!

[cbarrick]

So you're concerned about my use of the word "paper." That's fair I guess.

But the editorial in question was in fact published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal.

Just so that we're all clear on the facts:

- The editorial was published in Diabetes Care, Volume 49, Issue 6. [1]

- Diabetes Care is a publication of the American Diabetes Association (ADA). It is a peer-reviewed scientific journal with an IF of 16. [2]

- The paper being distributed was an editorial, not research. [3]

- Steven Kahn, first author of the editorial and one of those thrown out of the conference, is the editor-in-chief of Diabetes Care. [4]

- The conference in question was The American Diabetes Association’s Scientific Sessions. [5]

The important question: Should the distribution of an editorial published in an ADA journal be considered a code of conduct violation at the ADA conference?

[1]: https://diabetesjournals.org/care/issue/49/6 [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diabetes_Care [3]: https://diabetesjournals.org/care/article/49/6/901/164764/Mi... [4]: https://diabetesjournals.org/care/pages/Editorial_Board [5]: https://professional.diabetes.org/scientific-sessions

[MemoryHoleHQ]

And right at the top of that editorial piece, it says:

"The opinions expressed in this editorial are the personal views of the authors (S.E. Kahn, C.A.M. Anderson, J.B. Buse, and E. Selvin) and do not represent those of the American Diabetes Association or the authors’ employers..."

So, the bottom of this seems to be that a journal was hijacked by editors who are interested in doing politics instead of research, used their power to publish political opinion pieces and have them show up with what is apparently the ADA stamp of approval (although the text has to state that's not really the case... but who reads the little text anyway?) and then, not being happy with all that, they still tried to hijack a research conference to do political stunts.

[cbarrick]

The journal regularly includes commentaries and editorials on political and economic topics [1][2]. Political talks regularly occur at the conference [3].

In fact, the trigger to all of this was a scheduled talk by Jay Bhattacharya, Director of the NIH and a controversial political figure.

It seems silly to imply that politics are to be excluded from the conference at all costs when the ADA regularly invites political speakers to that same conference.

Do you believe that handing out copies of this editorial constituted inappropriate behavior? If so, why?

[1]: https://diabetesjournals.org/care/article/49/1/5/163166/The-... [2]: https://diabetesjournals.org/care/article/48/8/1309/162954/T... [3]: https://diabetesjournals.org/care/pages/2025_ada_diabetes_ca...