DOCSLIB.ORG

1 Vegan Epistemology

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
1 Vegan Epistemology Becker - 1 Vegan Epistemology: Reforming Human Knowledge Practices from a Vegan Perspective Elizabeth Anderson argues that the political objectives of feminist epistemology—a line of inquiry concerned with the influence of gender-related issues and concepts on knowledge and research—are compatible with the “fundamental internal commitments” of science, such as commitments to theoretical reason and empirical evidence.1 While some might resist political goals as disruptive to the ‘objective’ standpoint favored in scientific inquiry, Anderson finds that such goals can actually be beneficial for the “self-critical and self-reforming institutions of science” insofar as they raise empirical questions that promote “critical self-reflections” and thereby remove unreliable belief-formation mechanisms and enable reliable ones.2 Thus, mainstream theorists cannot outright dismiss the concerns of feminist epistemologists on grounds of their political motivation alone; rather, Anderson argues, such theorists must contend with “epistemic reasons to reform our knowledge practices” identified by feminist epistemology in order to maintain commitments to methodological improvement.3 But Anderson’s point is not limited to feminism alone; rather, it extends to other motivations with the potential to spark needed reforms of knowledge practices. One such motivation is veganism: the moral and ethical stance predicated on ending the exploitation and slaughter of animals for human purposes, including food and clothing production, animal labor and captivity, and biomedical research.4 Veganism provides a standpoint from which many epistemological errors can be observed, challenged, and corrected. Such errors result from commitments to a series of 1 Elizabeth Anderson, “Feminist Epistemology: An Interpretation and a Defense,” Hypatia 10, no. 3 (Summer 1995): 50-84, 51-56. Anderson defines ‘theoretical reason’ as “the power to acquire, reject, and revise our cognitive attitudes (beliefs and theoretical commitments) and our practices of inquiry through reflection on our reasons for holding them and engaging in them” (52). 2 Ibid., 55. 3 Ibid. 4 The term ‘vegan’ is often wrongly conflated with a plant-based diet, which has led to a distinction between ‘veganism’ as a dietary lifestyle and ‘ethical veganism’ as a normative ideology. I find the term ‘vegan/veganism’ alone suffices to indicate the normative ideology based on its etymological history and origin. Becker - 2 underlying assumptions and beliefs integral to the epistemic condition of the animal-exploiting society. I argue that rational inquiry stands to benefit from vegan epistemology, here understood as a branch of naturalized social epistemology that studies the various influences of ‘carnism’ on knowledge production in order to identify biases and critique problematic practices. I begin by defining carnism, naturalized social epistemology, and vegan epistemology. Then, I identify three categories of carnist influence on knowledge, which vegan epistemology stands to correct: anthropocentrism, speciesism, and testimonial injustice. I conclude by addressing the role of vegan epistemology as a necessary counteragent of carnist social ignorance. ‘Carnism’ and Vegan Epistemology Carnism is the belief system in which the eating of certain animals is considered ethical and appropriate.5 It entails a set of assumptions and biases about humans, non-human animals, and nature, and comprises the ideology upon which the choice to exploit animals for human purposes, especially the choice to consume meat, is founded. Moreover, this belief system is largely “invisible,” Melanie Joy explains, because “we don’t see meat eating… as a choice, based on a set of assumptions about animals, our world, and ourselves. Rather, we see it as a given, the ‘natural’ thing to do.”6 The term ‘carnist’ is necessary to combat this invisibility, Joy continues, because the more familiar term ‘meat eater’ “isolates the practice of consuming meat, as though it were divorced from a person’s beliefs and values. It implies that the person who eats meat is acting outside of a belief system.”7 ‘Carnist’ is also more appropriate than ‘carnivore’ or ‘omnivore,’ as these terms denote biological constitution (the physiological ability or need to 5 Melanie Joy, Why We Love Dogs, Eat Pigs, and Wear Cows (Newburyport: Red Wheel Weiser, 2009), ePub. 6 Ibid. 7 Ibid. Becker - 3 ingest certain things) rather than philosophical choice. “Carnists eat meat not because they need to, but because they choose to,” Joy concludes, “and choices always stem from beliefs.”8 Thus, carnism is an ideology: a system or set of ideals and beliefs, each of which contributes to satisfying one’s conception of what is moral or true. Carnism is an ideology upon which animal exploitation depends. Like all ideologies, carnism is capable of infusing bias into self-purportedly ‘objective’ rational inquiry. Moreover, as an ‘invisible’ ideology that is pervasive in human society and institutions, it is especially dubious and yet remains largely unchecked even in the growing field of ‘meta-research’—a line of inquiry which seeks to improve research methods and practices in order to eliminate biases in performing, communicating, verifying, evaluating, and rewarding research.9 Furthermore, as an ideology deeply rooted in cultural identity and custom, carnism manifests in ways that are particularly resistant to criticism and reform. While vegans have done much work in the field of value theory, few have investigated the effects of carnism on knowledge and inquiry. Vegan epistemology, modeled after Anderson’s interpretation of feminist epistemology, serves to benefit institutions of science and inquiry as a ‘naturalized social epistemology’ with a commitment to ‘modest empiricism,’ which are defined as follows. Epistemology is the branch of philosophy concerned with knowledge, particularly the theory of justification for belief. Naturalized epistemology, as defined by Theresa W. Tobin and Alison M. Jaggar, is a “methodological turn… toward more empirically informed philosophical research,” which is necessary for making research “more continuous with results from empirical 8 Ibid. 9 John P.A. Ioannidis, Daniele Fanelli, Debbie Drake Dunne, and Steven N. Goodman, “Meta-Research: Evaluation and Improvement of Research Methods and Practices,” PLOS Biology 13, no. 10: 1-7. Becker - 4 science.”10 Just as clinical drug trials may be successful under controlled conditions and yet fail in various real world conditions, Tobin and Jaggar explain, models of justification created in the “controlled conditions of the philosopher’s imagination” (albeit with unacknowledged assumptions) may similarly fail to justify claims in the context of real life.11 Naturalized epistemology, then, is a form of meta-research, which aims to improve our knowledge practices (such as scientific methodology and rational inquiry) by grounding them in empirical terms. Social epistemology is a branch of naturalized epistemology focused on social aspects of inquiry; that is, it investigates social, collective, or interactive paths to knowledge, examines the spread of information across group membership, and examines social environments of inquirers such as economic and political situation.12 Social epistemology provides a much-needed correction to traditional epistemology’s focus on the mental operations of individuals in isolation or abstraction from others, Alvin I. Goldman argues, because it accounts for “the deeply collaborative and interactive nature of knowledge seeking,” especially in the modern world.13 Social epistemologists investigate the influence of specifically social factors on knowledge production, including the formal and informal inclusion or exclusion of types of people from research, the prestige of different fields and styles of inquiry, and facets of the inquirers, their subjects of study, and their investigational and cultural environment such as political and economic conditions, social settings, ideologies, biases, prejudices, assumptions, and cultural narratives used to structure observations and interpretations of results.14 10 Theresa W. Tobin and Alison M. Jaggar, “Naturalizing Moral Justification: Rethinking the Method of Moral Epistemology,” Metaphilosophy 44, no. 4 (July 2013): 409-439, 411-412. 11 Ibid., 410. 12 Alvin I. Goldman, Knowledge in a Social World (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999), 3. 13 Ibid., 3. 14 Anderson, “Feminist Epistemology,” 54. Becker - 5 Empiricism is the philosophical belief that all knowledge is derived from sensory experience. Modest empiricism, as defined by Anderson, is the view that “observation provides the least defeasible evidence we have about the world”—a less controversial claim, which avoids the absolute position of traditional empiricism and thus prefers certain types of evidence without eliminating the possibility of the existence of other types.15 Commitment to modest empiricism, then, requires framing questions of epistemology as empirical questions (constrained only by empirical adequacy) that cannot be responsibly ignored or dismissed; questions that pertain to phenomena and practice that are, at least in principle, empirically observable. Vegan epistemology, therefore, is a branch of naturalized social epistemology that seeks to raise empirical questions meant to improve knowledge practices and to identify social dimensions of carnist ideology in both the production and content of knowledge. I propose three dimensions of the carnist
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Derogatory Discourses of Veganism and the Reproduction of Speciesism in UK 1 National Newspapers Bjos 1348 134..152
    The British Journal of Sociology 2011 Volume 62 Issue 1 Vegaphobia: derogatory discourses of veganism and the reproduction of speciesism in UK 1 national newspapers bjos_1348 134..152 Matthew Cole and Karen Morgan Abstract This paper critically examines discourses of veganism in UK national newspapers in 2007. In setting parameters for what can and cannot easily be discussed, domi- nant discourses also help frame understanding. Discourses relating to veganism are therefore presented as contravening commonsense, because they fall outside readily understood meat-eating discourses. Newspapers tend to discredit veganism through ridicule, or as being difficult or impossible to maintain in practice. Vegans are variously stereotyped as ascetics, faddists, sentimentalists, or in some cases, hostile extremists. The overall effect is of a derogatory portrayal of vegans and veganism that we interpret as ‘vegaphobia’. We interpret derogatory discourses of veganism in UK national newspapers as evidence of the cultural reproduction of speciesism, through which veganism is dissociated from its connection with debates concerning nonhuman animals’ rights or liberation. This is problematic in three, interrelated, respects. First, it empirically misrepresents the experience of veganism, and thereby marginalizes vegans. Second, it perpetuates a moral injury to omnivorous readers who are not presented with the opportunity to understand veganism and the challenge to speciesism that it contains. Third, and most seri- ously, it obscures and thereby reproduces
    [Show full text]
  • Taste and Health Vegetarianism.Pdf
    Appetite 144 (2020) 104469 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Appetite journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/appet Taste and health concerns trump anticipated stigma as barriers to T vegetarianism ∗ Daniel L. Rosenfeld , A. Janet Tomiyama University of California, Los Angeles, USA ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Keywords: Meat-eaters report that a number of barriers inhibit them from going vegetarian—for example, perceiving ve- Vegetarianism getarian diets to be inadequately nutritious, too expensive, unfamiliar, inconvenient, inadequately tasty, and Barriers socially stigmatizing. However, research identifying which barriers uniquely predict meat-eaters’ openness to Food choice going vegetarian is lacking from the current literature. In the present research, accordingly, we conducted a Identity highly powered, preregistered study (N = 579) to identify which barriers uniquely predict openness to going Stigma vegetarian. We focused specifically on anticipated vegetarian stigma, given recent qualitative evidence high- lighting this attitude as an influential barrier. That is, do meat-eaters resist going vegetarian because theyfear that following a vegetarian diet would make them feel stigmatized? Being of younger age, more politically conservative, White, and residing in a rural community predicted greater anticipated vegetarian stigma among meat-eaters. Frequentist and Bayesian analyses converged, however, to suggest that anticipated vegetarian stigma was not a significant predictor of openness to going vegetarian. The strongest predictors
    [Show full text]
  • Liberación Animal 1972 - 1986 Datos De La Edición Original: Against All Odds
    Liberación animal 1972 - 1986 Datos de la edición original: Against all odds. Animal Liberation 1972-1986 Impreso y editado por ARC PRINT. Editado por primera vez en el Estado español por Eztabaida Argitalpenak en 2010. Traducciones de la presente edición a cargo de: Inma Navarro (texto principal), Promoviendo el Veganismo y ochodoscuatro ediciones. Correcciones de la presente edición a cargo de: Nahid Steingress, Regina Sanchís y Gabriela Parada Mtz. Todas las notas al pie han sido redactadas por las traductoras, correctoras o personas del colectivo editorial, de la presente edición o de la anterior. Ilustración de portada: ochodoscuatro ediciones. Las fotografías que aparecen en las tripas de este libro son, en su mayoría, cortesía de Lewis Pogson y John McKenzie como parte de su archivo personal. Algunas otras son recortes de revistas accesibles en el archivo digital The Talon Conspiracy. Esta edición ve la luz por primera vez en Madrid, en junio de 2019. ochodoscuatro ediciones Depósito Legal: M-14981-2019 ISBN: 978-84-946223-8-0 Todos los beneficios de este libro irán destinados a la difusión de las ideas antiespecistas. Queda terminantemente recomendada la difusión total o parcial de esta obra siempre y cuando se utilice con fines no comerciales. Para cualquier otro uso, es necesaria la autorización expresa de la asamblea de la editorial. Este libro está dedicado a: Sally – 2 años, Lesley – 6 meses, Bev – 2 años, Virginia – 18 meses, Nancy – 6 meses, Debbie – 2 años, Delia – 2 años, Peter – 2 años, Eric – 18 meses, David – 2 años, Paul – 2,5 años, Karl – 18 meses, Duncan – 2 años, Jim – 2 años, Nick – 2 años, Nigel – 2 años, Alistair – 18 meses, Carl – 18 meses, Boris – 6 meses, Gary – 18 meses, Keith – 2 años, Mike – 18 meses, Julian – 12 meses, Alan – 2 años, y Sally – 12 meses.
    [Show full text]
  • Moral Implications of Darwinian Evolution for Human Reference
    Andrews University Digital Commons @ Andrews University Dissertations Graduate Research 2006 Moral Implications of Darwinian Evolution for Human Reference Based in Christian Ethics: a Critical Analysis and Response to the "Moral Individualism" of James Rachels Stephen Bauer Andrews University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/dissertations Part of the Christianity Commons, Ethics in Religion Commons, Evolution Commons, and the Religious Thought, Theology and Philosophy of Religion Commons Recommended Citation Bauer, Stephen, "Moral Implications of Darwinian Evolution for Human Reference Based in Christian Ethics: a Critical Analysis and Response to the "Moral Individualism" of James Rachels" (2006). Dissertations. 16. https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/dissertations/16 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate Research at Digital Commons @ Andrews University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ Andrews University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Thank you for your interest in the Andrews University Digital Library of Dissertations and Theses. Please honor the copyright of this document by not duplicating or distributing additional copies in any form without the author’s express written permission. Thanks for your cooperation. Andrews University Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary MORAL IMPLICATIONS OF DARWINIAN EVOLUTION FOR HUMAN PREFERENCE BASED IN CHRISTIAN ETHICS: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS AND RESPONSE TO THE “MORAL INDIVIDUALISM” OF JAMES RACHELS A Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy by Stephen Bauer November 2006 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. UMI Number: 3248152 Copyright 2006 by Bauer, Stephen All rights reserved.
    [Show full text]
  • Vegetarianism and Virtue: Does Consequentialism Demand Too Little?
    WellBeing International WBI Studies Repository 1-2002 Vegetarianism and Virtue: Does Consequentialism Demand Too Little? Nathan Nobis University of Rochester Follow this and additional works at: https://www.wellbeingintlstudiesrepository.org/acwp_aafhh Part of the Animal Studies Commons, Other Anthropology Commons, and the Other Nutrition Commons Recommended Citation Nobis, N. (2002). Vegetarianism and Virtue: Does consequentialism Demand Too Little?. Social Theory & Practice, 28(1), 135-156. This material is brought to you for free and open access by WellBeing International. It has been accepted for inclusion by an authorized administrator of the WBI Studies Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Vegetarianism and Virtue: Does Consequentialism Demand Too Little? Nathan Nobis Department of Philosophy, University of Rochester I will argue that each of us personally ought to be a vegetarian.1 Actually, the conclusion I will attempt to defend concerns more than one's eating habits in that I will argue that we should be "vegans." Not only should we not buy and eat meat, but we should also not purchase fur coats, stoles, and hats, or leather shoes, belts, jackets, purses and wallets, furniture, car interiors, and other traditionally animal-based products for which there are readily available plant-based or synthetic alternatives. (Usually these are cheaper and work just as well, or better, anyway.) I will argue that buying and eating most eggs and dairy products are immoral as well. (Since it's much easier
    [Show full text]
  • Hans Ruesch, the Swiss Racing Driver, Best-Selling Author and Pioneer Of
    Hans Ruesch, the Swiss racing driver, best-selling author and pioneer of the antivivisection movement, born on May 17, 1913, died on August 26, 2007, at the age of 94 of cancer in Lugano. He was the last surviving grand prix winner of the interwar "golden age" of motor racing. Two of his novels were made into Hollywood films, and his subsequent publications helped give impetus to the international antivivisection movement. Hans Ruesch in 1967 The son of a German-speaking Swiss father and an Italian-speaking Swiss mother, Ruesch spent the first 13 years of his life in Naples, where his father owned a textile mill. Schooled in Switzerland, he studied law briefly at the University of Zurich before leaving at the age of 19 to pursue his interest in fast cars. His first competitive drive was in 1932 in an MG, but before long he could be seen at the wheel of more potent machines from Alfa Romeo and Maserati. Third place in an Alfa in the 1500cc category at the 1932 Brno grand prix at the Masaryk-Ring in Czechoslovakia was followed by victories in various hill climbs in the Swiss Alps. In his second year, he acquired a three-litre Maserati, with which he picked up further hill climb trophies and set a new world speed record for the standing-start kilometer, averaging 88.33 mph at the Montlhery autodrome outside Paris. Ice racing on frozen lakes was a popular sport at the time, and in 1934 Ruesch and his Maserati 8CM won events on the Titisee and the Eibsee in Germany.
    [Show full text]
  • A Writer's Calendar
    A WRITER’S CALENDAR Compiled by J. L. Herrera for my mother and with special thanks to Rose Brown, Peter Jones, Eve Masterman, Yvonne Stadler, Marie-France Sagot, Jo Cauffman, Tom Errey and Gianni Ferrara INTRODUCTION I began the original calendar simply as a present for my mother, thinking it would be an easy matter to fill up 365 spaces. Instead it turned into an ongoing habit. Every time I did some tidying up out would flutter more grubby little notes to myself, written on the backs of envelopes, bank withdrawal forms, anything, and containing yet more names and dates. It seemed, then, a small step from filling in blank squares to letting myself run wild with the myriad little interesting snippets picked up in my hunting and adding the occasional opinion or memory. The beginning and the end were obvious enough. The trouble was the middle; the book was like a concertina — infinitely expandable. And I found, so much fun had the exercise become, that I was reluctant to say to myself, no more. Understandably, I’ve been dependent on other people’s memories and record- keeping and have learnt that even the weightiest of tomes do not always agree on such basic ‘facts’ as people’s birthdays. So my apologies for the discrepancies which may have crept in. In the meantime — Many Happy Returns! Jennie Herrera 1995 2 A Writer’s Calendar January 1st: Ouida J. D. Salinger Maria Edgeworth E. M. Forster Camara Laye Iain Crichton Smith Larry King Sembene Ousmane Jean Ure John Fuller January 2nd: Isaac Asimov Henry Kingsley Jean Little Peter Redgrove Gerhard Amanshauser * * * * * Is prolific writing good writing? Carter Brown? Barbara Cartland? Ursula Bloom? Enid Blyton? Not necessarily, but it does tend to be clear, simple, lucid, overlapping, and sometimes repetitive.
    [Show full text]
  • “Human Being” a Moral Concept?
    QQ version – Oct. 26, 2010 Is “Human Being” a Moral Concept? Douglas MacLean Is “human being” a moral concept? I believe it is, which makes me a speciesist. Speciesism violates a moral principle of equality. Peter Singer defines it as “a prejudice or attitude of bias toward the interests of members of one’s own species and against those of members of other species.” He compares it to racism. My goal in this essay is to defend a speciesist attitude or outlook on morality. This defense consists in little more than sympathetically describing certain intuitions and exploring some of their implications. I have no further argument to show that this view is true or correct; in fact, I don’t know what such an argument would look like. As I see it, each side in debates about speciesism reveals different assumptions or begs different questions about the foundation of ethics. Critics of speciesism see ethics as grounded in status-conferring individual properties that generate agent-neutral reasons. The outlook I will describe is based on a conviction that ethics is inextricably tied to practices that define what it is to live a human life. The most general reasons in this conception of morality are human reasons. They are norms for creatures like us, but not necessarily for gods, intelligent aliens, or other possible agents. They are not agent-neutral. By defending a speciesist outlook on morality I do not mean to suggest that animal suffering has no moral significance. A decent human life takes seriously things like cruelty, callousness, or indifference to the natural world.
    [Show full text]
  • Veganism Through a Racial Lens: Vegans of Color Navigating Mainstream Vegan Networks
    Portland State University PDXScholar University Honors Theses University Honors College 5-24-2018 Veganism through a Racial Lens: Vegans of Color Navigating Mainstream Vegan Networks Iman Chatila Portland State University Follow this and additional works at: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/honorstheses Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Chatila, Iman, "Veganism through a Racial Lens: Vegans of Color Navigating Mainstream Vegan Networks" (2018). University Honors Theses. Paper 562. https://doi.org/10.15760/honors.569 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in University Honors Theses by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. Please contact us if we can make this document more accessible: [email protected]. Running head: VEGANISM THROUGH A RACIAL LENS 1 Veganism Through a Racial Lens: Vegans of Color Navigating Mainstream Vegan Networks by Iman Chatila An undergraduate honors thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Bachelor of Science degree in University Honors and Psychology. Thesis Advisor: Charles Klein, PhD, Department of Anthropology Portland State University 2018 Contact: [email protected] VEGANISM THROUGH A RACIAL LENS 2 Table of Contents Abstract 3 Introduction 4 Background 5 Methods 7 Positionality 7 Research Questions 7 Interviews & Analysis 8 Results & Discussion 8 Demographics: Race, Age, Education, & Duration of Veganism 8 Social Norms of Vegan Communities 9 Leadership & Redefining Activism 13 Food
    [Show full text]
  • The Covid Pandemic, 'Pivotal' Moments, And
    Animal Studies Journal Volume 10 Number 1 Article 10 2021 The Covid Pandemic, ‘Pivotal’ Moments, and Persistent Anthropocentrism: Interrogating the (Il)legitimacy of Critical Animal Perspectives Paula Arcari Edge Hill University Follow this and additional works at: https://ro.uow.edu.au/asj Part of the Animal Studies Commons, Critical and Cultural Studies Commons, Politics and Social Change Commons, and the Social Influence and oliticalP Communication Commons Recommended Citation Arcari, Paula, The Covid Pandemic, ‘Pivotal’ Moments, and Persistent Anthropocentrism: Interrogating the (Il)legitimacy of Critical Animal Perspectives, Animal Studies Journal, 10(1), 2021, 186-239. Available at:https://ro.uow.edu.au/asj/vol10/iss1/10 Research Online is the open access institutional repository for the University of Wollongong. For further information contact the UOW Library: [email protected] The Covid Pandemic, ‘Pivotal’ Moments, and Persistent Anthropocentrism: Interrogating the (Il)legitimacy of Critical Animal Perspectives Abstract Situated alongside, and intertwined with, climate change and the relentless destruction of ‘wild’ nature, the global Covid-19 pandemic should have instigated serious reflection on our profligate use and careless treatment of other animals. Widespread references to ‘pivotal moments’ and the need for a reset in human relations with ‘nature’ appeared promising. However, important questions surrounding the pandemic’s origins and its wider context continue to be ignored and, as a result, this moment has proved anything but pivotal for animals. To explore this disconnect, this paper undertakes an analysis of dominant Covid discourses across key knowledge sites comprising mainstream media, major organizations, academia, and including prominent animal advocacy organizations. Drawing on the core tenets of Critical Animal Studies, the concept of critical animal perspectives is advanced as a way to assess these discourses and explore the illegitimacy of alternative ways of thinking about animals.
    [Show full text]
  • Facts & Figures 2015-2016
    1 FACTS & FIGURES 2015-2016 Thirty-sixth Edition June 2016 Office of Institutional Effectiveness and Analysis UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM Birmingham, Alabama 35294-0104 (205) 934-2384 www.uab.edu/institutionaleffectiveness 2 FOREWORD The Office of Institutional Effectiveness and Analysis is pleased to present Facts & Figures 2015-2016. This is the 36th edition of the UAB factbook, the seventeenth edition available electronically on the web. Facts & Figures is compiled by the Office of Institutional Effectiveness and Analysis but reflects contributions from offices all over campus. We remain grateful for our contributors’ continued assistance. Facts & Figures can be easily accessed electronically via the Office of Institutional Effectiveness and Analysis web site (www.uab.edu/institutionaleffectiveness). Our objective with this factbook is to produce a useful and usable resource for a variety of information needs. Therefore, we welcome and appreciate your comments and suggestions to [email protected] about the content of Facts & Figures. 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS GENERAL INFORMATION UAB’s Strategic Plan ................................................................................................................................... 7 The Board of Trustees ................................................................................................................................ 8 Administration ............................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • HIV Twenty-Eight Years Later: What Is the Truth? Gary Null, Phd December 3, 2012
    HIV Twenty-Eight Years Later: What is the Truth? Gary Null, PhD December 3, 2012 In the May 4, 1984 issue of the prestigious journal Science, one of the most important research papers of the last quarter century was published. “Frequent Detection and Isolation of Cytopathic Retroviruses (HTLV-III) from Patients with AIDS and at Risk for AIDS” would rapidly become the medical Magna Carta for the entire gold rush to develop diagnostic methods to identify the presence of HIV in human blood and to invent pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines in a global war against AIDS. This paper, along with three others published in the same issue of Science, was written by Dr. Robert Gallo, then head of the Laboratory of Tumor Cell Biology (LTCB) at the National Cancer Institute (NCI) in Bethesda, Maryland, and his lead researcher Dr. Mikulas Popovic. To this day, this article continues to document the most cited research to prove the HIV hypothesis in scientific papers and places like the nation’s Centers of Disease Control (CDC) website. For virologists, molecular biologists and other infectious disease researchers, particularly those tied to the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries and the national medical and health institutions, the news of Gallo’s discovery was manna rained down from heaven. All research into other possible causes for the AIDS crisis ended abruptly. As soon as the winds shifted away from earlier efforts to find the cause of AIDS —people’s lifestyles, immune suppressing illicit drug use and other health risks and illnesses that adversely affect the body’s immune system — to that of a single new virus, the case was closed.
    [Show full text]