Science and ideology

More than 130 prominent Canadian physicians, scientists and public health professionals have endorsed this commentary. They are listed at: C ONSIDER THE FOLLOWING HYPOTHETICAL scenario. An innovative new intervention for people with diabetes is developed. Health Canada provides funding to a highly accomplished group of academic health scientists, who have no financial conflicts of interest with respect to the new intervention, to conduct research on its effectiveness. Their work shows that the new intervention significantly reduces the incidence of a variety of diabetic complications. Despite a careful search for possible adverse effects of the intervention, none are detected. Over a three-year period, the group's research findings are published in leading medical journals, including the New England Journal of Medicine, The Lancet and BMJ. In response, the federal government calls the research inconclusive and states its position that the only acceptable therapies for diabetes are those that either prevent or completely cure this condition. Two national organizations state their opposition to the intervention because they fear that the availability of an intervention that reduces the risk of diabetic complications will cause people with diabetes to eat more food and become more obese. The government indicates that, unless additional research can address its concerns within a year, it will likely move to ban the new intervention. Meanwhile, institutions other than the one at which the research was initially conducted are forbidden to provide the intervention. Although this tale seems far-fetched and even Orwellian, it becomes true to life if one substitutes " drug addiction " for " diabetes, " " drug-related harms " for " diabetic complications, " and " supervised injection facility for injection drug users " for " new intervention. " In a series of peer-reviewed research articles, the supervised injection facility in Vancouver has been shown to provide a number of benefits, including reduced needle sharing, decreased public drug use, fewer publicly discarded syringes, and more rapid entry into detoxification services by persons using the facility. The opening of the facility was not associated with any increase in levels of crime, public disorder, or injection drug use. 5 Despite this body of evidence, federal Health Minister Tony Clement released an official statement in September 2006 in which he claimed, " Right now the only thing the research to date has proven conclusively is drug addicts need more help to get off drugs. " 6 This statement came on the …