Scientists ejected from diabetes conference for distributing journal reprints • Hacker News Board

Re: Scientists ejected from diabetes conference for distributing journal reprints

#241

Post by ModernMech » Tue, Jun 09, 2026, 11:57 AM UTC

nandomrumber wrote: post #233

ModernMech wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So what? I pay taxes too, and I want social scientists to be paid using tax dollars for the work they do, which I find valuable. There's plenty I take issue with my taxes being paid for but I just put up with it because we live in a society where my priorities aren't the only ones. Why can't you take that approach with social scientists?

Why should it bother you that my interests don’t align perfectly with yours. Having said that, I appreciate the wide point you’re making.

> Why should it bother you that my interests don’t align perfectly with yours.

That's exactly what I'm saying! It doesn't bother me that your interests don't align with mine, I help pay for them anyway... why can't you take that position with social science?

Re: Scientists ejected from diabetes conference for distributing journal reprints

#242

Post by AlexeyBelov » Wed, Jun 10, 2026, 5:52 AM UTC

astura wrote: post #85

embedding-shape wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Using what words specifically? Besides HN, even people commenting on reddit tends to self-censor words like "r@pe" just because they've realized they get penalized if they talk about things too clearly, on other platforms. Same with general strikes, censorship and more, even on platforms where you don't get downranked automatically just because you used specific terms, people have now started self-censor in those way…

>people commenting on reddit tends to self-censor words like "r@pe" That's just because reddit is almost entirely children and bots/shills. Yes, a platform full of children is going to be childish.

Average Reddit user is in their late 20s or early 30s.

Re: Scientists ejected from diabetes conference for distributing journal reprints

#243

Post by zackwu » Sat, Jun 13, 2026, 1:00 AM UTC

donkey_brains wrote: post #51

embedding-shape wrote: post #39

> “They physically grabbed us, forced us out of the conference center, and now are telling us we can no longer attend this meeting,” Kelly told MedPage Today, which first reported the incident. “They’re taking our lanyards. It really has come to this in America. Censorship is real. America needs to stand up. Scientists, stand up. Physicians, stand up.” It's become very evident from the outside that the best time to s…

I completely agree with what you are saying, but I have grown too cynical to believe it will ever happen. American capitalism has been very effective at ensuring 2 outcomes: - The population is kept just comfortable enough to become complacent, with easy access to intoxicants, brainrot media and fast food. Now there are even robots that can do our thinking for us. A large percentage of people are brainwashed into thi…

oh man, "we have nothing to lose but our jobs" really cracked me up in a sad way

Re: Scientists ejected from diabetes conference for distributing journal reprints

#244

Post by eduction » Wed, Jun 17, 2026, 3:12 PM UTC

adrian_b wrote: post #93

eduction wrote: post #45

[flagged]

As TFA explains and other posters have also mentioned, they did not violate any code of conduct. Only the organizers have violated the code of conduct. A conference for the members of a medical association has the stated purpose of providing a venue for the exchange of information between the members. When the authors of an article published in the journal of the said medical association distribute free copies of tha…

That's clearly a matter of opinion, the organizers are citing the code, and the idea that codes could be interpreted different ways by different people, and/or disingenuously weaponized, was part of the objection to codes of conduct in the first place.

Re: Scientists ejected from diabetes conference for distributing journal reprints

#245

Post by mcswell » Fri, Jun 19, 2026, 4:00 PM UTC

throwaway394085 wrote: post #146

mcswell wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good point, so here's how I worded my FB post without even mentioning diabetes (URL truncated here because that's how FB displays them, but it works): "Scientists were ejected from a meeting of the American Diabetes Associate for distributing printouts of an editorial that had appeared in the ADA journal. Here's the link: https://diabetesjournals.org/.../Misguided-Brushes-of-a .... The article highlights "the many th…

> What do people not understand about the First Amendment? Are you implying that the ADA is bound by the First Amendment in this case? If so, can you elaborate how?

Maybe not, but this is clearly a free speech issue. Because if the article being passed out had been anything but an editorial about Trump's administration (and particularly RFK Jr), they would never have been evicted from the meeting. It was clearly for fear of Trump's potential retribution that the ADA kicked them out. So that's what I mean about the First Amendment.