The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment

[Ivan Seeking]

Wow! I had heard of this but really didn't understand what had happened.

The United States government did something that was wrong—deeply, profoundly, morally wrong. It was an outrage to our commitment to integrity and equality for all our citizens . . . clearly racist. —President Clinton's apology for the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment to the eight remaining survivors, May 16, 1997

For forty years between 1932 and 1972, the U.S. Public Health Service (PHS) conducted an experiment on 399 black men in the late stages of syphilis. These men, for the most part illiterate sharecroppers from one of the poorest counties in Alabama, were never told what disease they were suffering from or of its seriousness. Informed that they were being treated for “bad blood,”1 their doctors had no intention of curing them of syphilis at all. The data for the experiment was to be collected from autopsies of the men, and they were thus deliberately left to degenerate under the ravages of tertiary syphilis—which can include tumors, heart disease, paralysis, blindness, insanity, and death. “As I see it,” one of the doctors involved explained, “we have no further interest in these patients until they die.”

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0762136.html

Also
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/health/may97/tuskegee_5-16.html
http://www.npr.org/programs/morning/features/2002/jul/tuskegee/
http://www.gpc.edu/~shale/humanities/composition/assignments/experiment/tuskegee.html

 

[Ivan Seeking]

This story makes clear my objection to many opinions expressed in this and the other science forums. The next time someone automatically turns up their nose at the notion of conspiracies, tell them to get their head out of the clouds. Conspiracies are a very real part of life on every level. It is naive and foolish to think otherwise.

In 1990, a survey found that 10 percent of African Americans believed that the U.S. government created AIDS as a plot to exterminate blacks, and another 20 percent could not rule out the possibility that this might be true. As preposterous and paranoid as this may sound, at one time the Tuskegee experiment must have seemed equally farfetched. Who could imagine the government, all the way up to the Surgeon General of the United States, deliberately allowing a group of its citizens to die from a terrible disease for the sake of an ill-conceived experiment? In light of this and many other shameful episodes in our history, African Americans' widespread mistrust of the government and white society in general should not be a surprise to anyone.

 

[Aquamarine]

The problem with conspiracy theories is that they are in many cases outside science. Usually they cannot be disproven, there will always be the possibility that the conspiracy has fabricated any evidence against it. Especially the more large scale conspiracies. And it is always possible to fit the facts to the theory by making the theory more complex and ad hoc.

Conspiracy theories should therefore be evaluated by how well they make predictions. Alternatively, by how complex their explanation is, a conspiracy theory is only interesting if it less complex than previous explanations. (Ockham's razor). And large scale, world-wide, long-time conspiraces are very complex.

 

[russ_watters]

This story makes clear my objection to many opinions expressed in this and the other science forums. The next time someone automatically turns up their nose at the notion of conspiracies, tell them to get their head out of the clouds. Conspiracies are a very real part of life on every level. It is naive and foolish to think otherwise.

To me that quote below says the opposite: the fact that consipiracies exist makes people irrationally believe they are everywhere. That's a bad thing.

Yes, some conspiracies are real: that doesn't mean all are. Science sites are about sticking to reality.

Case-in-point: the Kursk thread above and the recent 9/11 thread. Entertaining, yes, but indicative of a serious problem - a disconnect with reality.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Case in point, this thread. Don't change the subject.

Conspiracies are real, dangerous, and abundant. The most dangerous thing about the wacko conspiracy theories is that they discredit the notion that real conspiracies exist. Conspiracies are reality. I'm sure that the 399 men, their affected wives and children, and their families would agree. Don't you, Russ? Isn't this real enough for you?

Consider the magnitude of what people are capable of given so called good motives. I am sure that virtually every person involved had some rationalization to justify what they were doing.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Most conspiracies sound wacko until proven to be real. Then they are called shocking.

I'm not saying that anyone should run off and join any conspiracy clubs. I'm saying, don't beat the notion of conspiracies into the ground to the point where we would all be sitting ducks.

The other problem is that the word conspiracy cannotes a large and radical conspiracy. This is also misleading. A conspiracy only requires two people, but two people can do a lot of damage.

 

[Aquamarine]

The Tuskegee experiment is a small scale conspiracy and is plausible.However, most people prefer gigantic world-wide and/or supernatural conspiracies like many of those here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_theory
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_alleged_conspiracy_theories

One problem with conspiracies is that they are extremely difficult to keep secret as the number of people increase. The information about the conspiracy becomes valuable. And people will be tempted to reveal it when charged with other crimes, for blackmail, revenge, ethical reasons or to write a bestseller. And not even the threat of violence can stop that since many people think too highly of themselves and that they can avoid any threats.

One other problem with illegal conspiracies is that they cannot use the legal system. As such they have no legal way to resolve internal conflicts. That means that large conspiracies will splinter into small groups usually waging violent terror against each other. That is the reason there are no criminal organizations having a monopoly on the scale of nations. Even the mafia was split into many groups often fighting each other and even together they never had any absolute control even of organized crime in the US.

The only large scale conspiracies on the scale of the world that can succeed are those organized by the state. They usually become known for the reasons state above but this does not matter since they are legal, at least in their own country. And they can use the legal system to resolve internal conflicts. For examples see "Real life imitates conspiracy theory"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_theory

 

[kcballer21]

I'm sorry, this is off topic, but I had to post it. This is from the wikipedia site that Aquamarine referenced:

"As of 12th October 2004, Exxon Mobile's share price has risen by 48% since the invasion of Iraq, out-performing the Dow Jone's average by 18%." hmmm...
Also, the search for WMD's is officially over; there are none, and they don't expect to find any. You can find the story at aol.com.

ok, now back to the tuskegee tragedy.

 

[kat]

I'm sorry, this is off topic, but I had to post it. This is from the wikipedia site that Aquamarine referenced:

"As of 12th October 2004, Exxon Mobile's share price has risen by 48% since the invasion of Iraq, out-performing the Dow Jone's average by 18%."

Or yeah..." hmmm..." 2 words for you conspiricist...venezaula..and soros...er, 3 words i guess.

Also, the search for WMD's is officially over; there are none, and they don't expect to find any. You can find the story at aol.com.

ok, now back to the tuskegee tragedy.

OooOoooh..yeah...see I told you it was true...that UN/syria/russian/french conspiracy...ebil ebil ebil...

 

[the number 42]

Who was it who said something like: "For those who believe, no evidence is necessary. For those who don't believe, no amount of evidence is enough"?

 

[kcballer21]

wow, kat has it all figured out, plus she's condescending. So, problems in Venezuela = 48% rise in exxon share price since start of Iraq war...

"OooOoooh..yeah...see I told you it was true...that UN/syria/russian/french conspiracy...ebil ebil ebil..." Is that a reference to porky pig? No, you're right Kat, no one was trying to tell Bush that Iraq didn't have wmd's or nuclear capabilities. Bush didn't use selected sources to justify a war that has achieved... wait, what was the point? Do you need sources for all this? Turn off Fox for starters. And oh, nobody is impressed by what you surely consider to be witty satire.

 

[russ_watters]

Case in point, this thread. Don't change the subject.

Yeah, who did that in post 2...? :uhh:

Conspiracies are real, dangerous, and abundant. The most dangerous thing about the wacko conspiracy theories is that they discredit the notion that real conspiracies exist. Conspiracies are reality. I'm sure that the 399 men, their affected wives and children, and their families would agree. Don't you, Russ?

And I absolutely agree as well.

Isn't this real enough for you?

Now what would make you say that? This one was real. My objection is to conspiracy theories that are not real. You're attempting a straw-man here, Ivan. You are the one who tried to extend this to be a general statement about conspiracy theories, not me.

Yes, this particular conspiracy was real and heinous. Why couldn't you just leave it at that? In fact, to me that's disrespectful: "...they discredit the notion that real conspiracies exist..." Exactly. By trying to extend this, you're being disrepectful to those 399 men and discrediting the conspiracy that harmed them.

 

[the number 42]

This is from the wikipedia site that Aquamarine referenced:
"As of 12th October 2004, Exxon Mobile's share price has risen by 48% since the invasion of Iraq, out-performing the Dow Jone's average by 18%." hmmm... Also, the search for WMD's is officially over; there are none, and they don't expect to find any. .

What about the Blair governments conspiracy theory of 1/ Hussein having WMDs, and 2/ having the capability of hitting the UK with them within 45 minutes of launch. We went to war because we believed these lies.

"Key intelligence used to justify war with Iraq has now been shown to be unreliable, the Butler Report says...MI6 did not check its sources well enough, and sometimes relied on third hand reports. ...the 2002 dossier should not have included the claim Iraq could use weapons of mass destruction within 45 minutes without further explanation".
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3890961.stm

 

[kat]

wow, kat has it all figured out, plus she's condescending. So, problems in Venezuela = 48% rise in exxon share price since start of Iraq war...

erm..is that what I said?..I don't remember saying that..maybe you need to go back and quote in full... :yuck:

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Best Conspiracies
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=56663

 

[kcballer21]

We went to war because we believed these lies.

Let me add to that-

"We went to war because we (chicken hawks in DC) wanted to believe these lies (<--great word choice)."

There seems to be this common misconception that there was only one line of intelligence that the administration had to choose from. Let me put it this way, there was conflicting reports about wmd in Iraq and therefore reasonable doubt. So why rush to war? Oh yeah, the imminent threat thing.