Page 2 of 2 Previous

Continued: Readers Write (May 20): Police chief, Star Tribune's ideology, oil discovery, U research

  • Article by:
  • Last update: May 19, 2013 - 4:03 PM

Jeff Naylor, Minneapolis

* * *



Defense fails test on research controversy

In an attempt to shift focus away from a growing international scandal and toward its most outspoken critic, University of Minnesota Medical School dean Dr. Aaron Friedman falls beneath the dignity of an academic center dedicated to open and free inquiry (“U research case has been given a close look,” May 17). Was it really necessary to mention Dr. Carl Elliot by name eight times in nine paragraphs? Was it not possible for Dr. Friedman to address any of the many troubling facts of the case of a research subject who died while enrolled in a University of Minnesota study? Is the university’s standard defense that the case has been investigated — a defense that falls apart once one looks into the superficial nature of those reviews — the best his office can provide?

Given its sinking reputation in the eyes of the scores of prominent academics who have signed a petition urging Gov. Mark Dayton to order an independent investigation of the matter, the U deserves a better defense than the same dark recitation of the claim that “there’s nothing to see here, people. Move along.”

PAUL SCOTT, Rochester

  • related content

  • get related content delivered to your inbox

  • manage my email subscriptions


  • about opinion

  • The Opinion section is produced by the Editorial Department to foster discussion about key issues. The Editorial Board represents the institutional voice of the Star Tribune and operates independently of the newsroom.

  • Submit a letter or commentary
Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters