Dear All,

First, some important news about media coverage relating to the Harvard whitewash of the Douglass case. This story was covered very well by the FOX TV news outlet in Boston. Go to

http://www.myfoxboston.com/myfox/pages/News/Detail?contentId=664746&version=1&locale=EN-US&layoutCode=VSTY&pageId=3.1.1 for the story.

Second, thanks to all for the nearly 100 letters that have already been sent to President Bok outlining your own concerns as well as support for the initiative launched by Dr. Albert Burgstahler and other Harvard alumni. With these 100 letters (and you have seen 30 of them from around the US and seven other countries) I think we have seen the message articulated in a 100 different ways. I doubt very much if mere rhetroic can do more. So we now move onto phase 2.

Today, we are launching our online letter to President Bok. Here - apart from people personalizing the title of the message (if in doubt put “Veritas or Non Veritas - you choose!”) and the first line to say who you are (credentials, profession, where you live) - we are looking for NUMBERS. To sign go to http://actionstudio.org/?go=2413

Our goal is to get 1000 letters to President Bok within one week. It is doable but we need your help. Please sign this yourself  (if you haven’t done so already) then send it to as many other people as you possibly can - particularly whole email lists; people not already concerned about fluoridation and students and faculty at other universities.

For those who need more background information go to http://www.FluorideAction.net/harvard/

Many, many thanks.

Paul Connett

———————————————————

ONLINE LETTER PLEASE ADD NAME AT http://actionstudio.org/?go=2413

Dear President Bok,

I am very concerned by the charge that a Harvard Professor, Chester Douglass, misrepresented important research findings from his federally-funded study on fluoride exposure and osteosarcoma.

As detailed by the Environmental Working Group (EWG), Professor Douglass portrayed the research of his PhD student (Elise Bassin) as supporting his conclusion that there is no association between fluoridation and osteosarcoma (a rare, but often fatal, bone cancer). Douglass made this statement to a panel of the National Research Council (NRC) investigating the safety of fluoride in drinking water. As has now been discovered, however, the student’s work which  Douglass cited, sharply contradicted his claim.

While I was disturbed to read the well-documented ethics charge against Douglass, I was even more disturbed to read Harvard’s very brief, and completely inadequate, response on August 15, 2006.

This statement - coming 13 months after the ethics complaint was filed - provides no explanation at all to justify the University’s position that Douglass did not “intentionally” misrepresent the research. Nor does it explain why the investigators failed to make contact with EWG and seek direct testimony on the matter.

In my view, neither Douglass’s behavior nor the University’s response, lives up to your ancient motto “veritas.”

I therefore ask you President Bok to use your office to provide a convincing explanation for the investigator’s decision. Failing that, I respectfully suggest that you set up a follow-up inquiry involving a panel drawn from those who are not employed by Harvard and who hold no allegiance to the water fluoridation program. These investigators would review the panels’ findings and seek a response from EWG, then report back to you.

Until such actions are taken, the public’s confidence in Harvard’s allegiance to the highest standards of academic integrity could be irreparably damaged.

ONLINE LETTER PLEASE ADD NAME AT http://actionstudio.org/?go=2413