All SHP News News March 23, 2022

A Commentary on Countering Faulty Science Wins Award

Michelle Mello and Stanford colleagues win an annual award by the ABIM Foundation for a commentary that argued academics have an obligation to speak out against medical views that are contrary to science.
An illustration of an award
Getty Images

A commentary by Stanford Health Policy’s Michelle Mello and colleagues Philip Pizzo and David Spiegel — which argues that physicians and scientists have a professional obligation to respond when their peers misrepresent science — won a 12th annual John A. Benson Jr., MD, Professionalism Article prize by the ABIM Foundation.

The Feb. 4, 2021, JAMA Network viewpoint, “When Physicians Engage in Practices That Threaten the Nation’s Health,” contended the United States was expected to have been a global leader during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic.

“However, a less flattering story emerged about the inadequate U.S. response to COVID-19,” wrote Mello, a professor of health policy and professor of law, and Pizzo, MD, former dean of the School of Medicine and professor of microbiology and immunology, and Spiegel, MD, the associate chair of psychiatry and behavioral sciences.

“A number of leaders in federal, state, and local government, guided by political exigency and recommendations from a small number of physicians and scientists who ignored or dismissed science, refused to promote sensible, effective policies such as mask wearing and social distancing,” they wrote.

This resulted in the United States having more infections and deaths than other developed nations in proportion to population size, and with disproportionate effects of COVID-19 on already disadvantaged racial and socioeconomic groups.

They argued that one of the key contributors to this U.S. lagging behind other countries was the elevation of academic experts who appeared to have been chosen “because of their willingness to support government officials’ desires to discount the significance of the pandemic.”

While academic freedom “is a core value of the university and public speech is an important pillar of such freedom,” they wrote, universities also have a responsibility to speak out for truth and science in support of public health.

To take the view that respecting freedom of speech requires institutional silence when science is being subverted is to misunderstand the concept.
Michelle Mello, Philip Pizzo and Daniel Spiegel

The annual prizes are awarded to those who have made “outstanding contributions to the literature on medical professionalism.” The ABIM Foundation named the article prize in honor of American Board of International Medicine and ABIM Foundation President Emeritus John A. Benson, Jr., MD. Of the 700 articles that have been considered for the prize over the past 12 years, only 46 articles have won the award.

read more

Health Law Illustration
Commentary

U.S. Public Health Law — Foundations and Emerging Shifts

The COVID-19 pandemic has focused attention on the complex and sometimes conflicting relationship between individual rights and public health protection.
Supreme Court
Q&As

A Look at the Supreme Court Ruling on Vaccination Mandates

Two Stanford law, labor and health experts explain the legal and health implications of the Supreme Court ruling that struck down the Biden administration's COVID-19 vaccine mandate for large companies, while upholding another federal regulation calling on health-care workers in federally funded facilities to be vaccinated.
Illustration of a masks and law
Commentary

The Political and Judicial Battles Over Mask Mandates for Schools

Litigation over mask mandates takes a bizarre turn after political leaders in eight states introduce bans on mask requirements. Some state bans apply only to mandates adopted by school districts; others are broader. In this JAMA Health Forum viewpoint, health law experts Michelle Mello and David Studdert look at the various lawsuits, court rulings — and possible solutions.