#966
Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2001 10:31:39 -0500
From: Kelley Roy M <kelley.roy@UWLAX.EDU>
Subject: Re: AFA attack on CDC Director
** Visit the American Association for Health Education
** at www.aahperd.org/aahe
**
** The Official Call for Abstracts...
** HEDIR Technolgy Seminar
** http://www.hedir.org/aahe
**
It is interesting that what some view as an attack, I view as finally the
results of science being made public. If it is an attack it can only be
viewed as an attack on philosophy. As a contributor to a unpublished
manuscript that apparently formed the foundation of the recently release
from HHS regarding the effectiveness of condoms in preventing STD
transmission (the individuals with whom I was working were part of the
panel), I believe it is time that the CDC begin to completely inform those
people whom it is attempting to assist. As I personally reviewed the
literature regarding condom effectiveness several years ago, I could only
come up with two conclusions: 1) either officials at CDC had not reviewed
the literature before making the statement that "Condoms have been shown
effective in reducing the risks of STDs" or 2) they had reviewed the
literature and chose to ignore the findings and thus contributed to the
proliferation of misinformation that likely resulted in increases in
incidence of morbidity and mortality as a result of STD infection. It became
obvious to me that a the recent conclusion of an article published in JAMA
that, the promotion of condoms as a means of preventing STD infection was
based philosophy not science, was true. To the degree that officials of CDC,
such as Dr Jeffery Koplan, were responsible for creating and distributin
misinformation they should be help responsible.
We as a community of health professionals have not provided our constituents
with complete information. Daily I deal with students who believe they have
been taught that condoms have been shown effective in preventing all STDs.
When confronted with fact that that is not true , they express a variety of
emotions including anger and feelings of betrayal. I have had several
students express this thought - Do they not think we are intelligent enough
to realize that having sex even with a condom is dangerous and to make
different decisions. Why don't they tell us the truth.
I also think it is helpful to look at the level of acceptable risk from a
different perspective sometimes. The panel concluded that condom use results
in a 85% reduction of risk for HIV transmission. Is that acceptable risk?
Lets say that the airline I plan to use for my next flight has a horrible
safety record, in fact for a period of time less that one percent of their
passengers arrive alive. THe majority of people die as a result of their
behavior of flying on the airline. But the airline has made tremendous
safety progress an have reduced the risk of death by 85%. Now only 10-15% of
their passengers die. Would I continue to use that airline. Is a 10-15% risk
of death good enough? I think not. I would choose a different airline. When
I do international HIV/AIDS prevention training with teachers, I ask them to
establish what is an acceptable level of risk for their students, children,
etc. Teachers and health leaders all over the world will have indicated that
when dealing with the lives of their students and family, they want a level
of risk that is better than 99%. Only one out of 100 planes crash. It then
becomes obvious that condoms do not provide that level of acceptable risk.
Just some of my thought on a beautiful summer day in WI
R. Mark Kelley, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor & Director
Graduate School Health Education program
Department of Health Education and Health Promotion
209 Mitchell Hall
La Crosse, WI 54601
608-785-6791
608-785-6792(fax)
kelley.roy@uwlax.edu
http://www.uwlax.edu/faculty/kelley/
------------------------------
#967
Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2001 10:39:40 -0500
From: Wendy Cameron <wcameron@CO.PEORIA.IL.US>
Subject: Re: AFA attack on CDC Director
** Visit the American Association for Health Education
** at www.aahperd.org/aahe
**
** The Official Call for Abstracts...
** HEDIR Technolgy Seminar
** http://www.hedir.org/aahe
**
Very good insight. It's a perspective that not many people even want to
consider yet it is right on target. Thanks for sharing your thoughts with
the health education world.
WAC
Wendy A. Cameron, BS, CHES
Health Educator
Peoria City/County Health Department
2116 N. Sheridan Rd.
Peoria, IL 61604
************************
Phone: 309/679-6133
E-mail: wcameron@co.peoria.il.us
Fax: 309/679-6609
-----Original Message-----
From: Kelley Roy M [SMTP:kelley.roy@UWLAX.EDU]
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2001 10:32 AM
To: HEDIR-L@SIU.EDU
Subject: Re: AFA attack on CDC Director
** Visit the American Association for Health Education
** at www.aahperd.org/aahe
**
** The Official Call for Abstracts...
** HEDIR Technolgy Seminar
** http://www.hedir.org/aahe
**
It is interesting that what some view as an attack, I view as finally the
results of science being made public. If it is an attack it can only be
viewed as an attack on philosophy. As a contributor to a unpublished
manuscript that apparently formed the foundation of the recently release
from HHS regarding the effectiveness of condoms in preventing STD
transmission (the individuals with whom I was working were part of the
panel), I believe it is time that the CDC begin to completely inform those
people whom it is attempting to assist. As I personally reviewed the
literature regarding condom effectiveness several years ago, I could only
come up with two conclusions: 1) either officials at CDC had not reviewed
the literature before making the statement that "Condoms have been shown
effective in reducing the risks of STDs" or 2) they had reviewed the
literature and chose to ignore the findings and thus contributed to the
proliferation of misinformation that likely resulted in increases in
incidence of morbidity and mortality as a result of STD infection. It
became
obvious to me that a the recent conclusion of an article published in JAMA
that, the promotion of condoms as a means of preventing STD infection was
based philosophy not science, was true. To the degree that officials of
CDC,
such as Dr Jeffery Koplan, were responsible for creating and distributin
misinformation they should be help responsible.
We as a community of health professionals have not provided our
constituents
with complete information. Daily I deal with students who believe they have
been taught that condoms have been shown effective in preventing all STDs.
When confronted with fact that that is not true , they express a variety of
emotions including anger and feelings of betrayal. I have had several
students express this thought - Do they not think we are intelligent enough
to realize that having sex even with a condom is dangerous and to make
different decisions. Why don't they tell us the truth.
I also think it is helpful to look at the level of acceptable risk from a
different perspective sometimes. The panel concluded that condom use
results
in a 85% reduction of risk for HIV transmission. Is that acceptable risk?
Lets say that the airline I plan to use for my next flight has a horrible
safety record, in fact for a period of time less that one percent of their
passengers arrive alive. THe majority of people die as a result of their
behavior of flying on the airline. But the airline has made tremendous
safety progress an have reduced the risk of death by 85%. Now only 10-15%
of
their passengers die. Would I continue to use that airline. Is a 10-15%
risk
of death good enough? I think not. I would choose a different airline. When
I do international HIV/AIDS prevention training with teachers, I ask them
to
establish what is an acceptable level of risk for their students, children,
etc. Teachers and health leaders all over the world will have indicated
that
when dealing with the lives of their students and family, they want a level
of risk that is better than 99%. Only one out of 100 planes crash. It then
becomes obvious that condoms do not provide that level of acceptable risk.
Just some of my thought on a beautiful summer day in WI
R. Mark Kelley, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor & Director
Graduate School Health Education program
Department of Health Education and Health Promotion
209 Mitchell Hall
La Crosse, WI 54601
608-785-6791
608-785-6792(fax)
kelley.roy@uwlax.edu
http://www.uwlax.edu/faculty/kelley/
** Advertise Jobs On The HEDIR
** http://www.hpcareer.net/hedir.cfm
**
------------------------------
#968
Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2001 11:53:12 -0400
From: Don Ardell <donardel@TAMPABAY.RR.COM>
Subject: Re: AFA attack on CDC Director
** Visit the American Association for Health Education
** at www.aahperd.org/aahe
**
** The Official Call for Abstracts...
** HEDIR Technolgy Seminar
** http://www.hedir.org/aahe
**
The posts re the AFA attack on the CDC Director and rebuttals, such as by
R. Mark Kelley suggest a growing need for health promoters to participate
more in political action. Two essays at WW's Wellness Center address this
need and may be of interest to those on the HEDIR list service, namely
08/07 -- Creating A Political Constituency for Self-Management
08/08 -- Creating A Political Constituency for Self-Management II
Go to
http://www.wellnessweb.com/WELLNESS/Daily_reports/august2001/august_7_2001.h
tm
Don
Donald B. Ardell, Ph.D.
Publisher, ARDELL WELLNESS REPORT
Director, Wellness Center, WellnessWeb.com
**
------------------------------
#969
Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2001 13:13:57 -0700
From: Kristin Southworth <kmsouthworth@YAHOO.COM>
Subject: Re: AFA attack on CDC Director
** Visit the American Association for Health Education
** at www.aahperd.org/aahe
**
** The Official Call for Abstracts...
** HEDIR Technolgy Seminar
** http://www.hedir.org/aahe
**
I couldn't agree more! As health educators and
professionals, we need to advocate for scientifically
sound research in order to address these issues so a
consensus can be reached.
To quote the workshop summary: Scientific Evidence on
Condom Effectiveness for Sexually Transmitted Disease
(STD) Prevention from the DHHS, NIH and NIAID:
"The Panel stressed that the absence of definitive
conclusions reflected inadequacies of the evidence
available and should not be interpreted as proof of
the adequacy or inadequacy of the condom to reduce the
risk of STDs other than HIV transmission in men and
women and gonorrhea in men. To definitely answer the
remaining questions about condom effectiveness for
preventing STD infections will require well-designed
and ethically sound clinical studies." (pg.ii of the
Executive Summary)
Kristin Southworth, BS, CHES
--- Don Ardell <donardel@TAMPABAY.RR.COM> wrote:
> ** Visit the American Association for Health
> Education
> ** at www.aahperd.org/aahe
> **
> ** The Official Call for Abstracts...
> ** HEDIR Technolgy Seminar
> ** http://www.hedir.org/aahe
> **
>
> The posts re the AFA attack on the CDC Director and
> rebuttals, such as by
> R. Mark Kelley suggest a growing need for health
> promoters to participate
> more in political action. Two essays at WW's
> Wellness Center address this
> need and may be of interest to those on the HEDIR
> list service, namely
> 08/07 -- Creating A Political Constituency for
> Self-Management
> 08/08 -- Creating A Political Constituency for
> Self-Management II
>
> Go to
>
http://www.wellnessweb.com/WELLNESS/Daily_reports/august2001/august_7_2001.h
> tm
>
>
> Don
>
> Donald B. Ardell, Ph.D.
>
> Publisher, ARDELL WELLNESS REPORT
>
> Director, Wellness Center, WellnessWeb.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> **
>
> ** Advertise Jobs On The HEDIR
> ** http://www.hpcareer.net/hedir.cfm
> **
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger
http://phonecard.yahoo.com/
------------------------------
#970
Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2001 16:26:25 -0400
From: "Michael P. McNeil" <mcneil@OSWEGO.EDU>
Subject: Re: AFA attack on CDC Director
** Visit the American Association for Health Education
** at www.aahperd.org/aahe
**
** The Official Call for Abstracts...
** HEDIR Technolgy Seminar
** http://www.hedir.org/aahe
**
I sent a letter to President Bush and a cc to Dr. Satcher offering my support
of his inclusion of scientific based information in the report. I would
encourage others to do so! I am pasting the text of my letter below. Feel
free to do something similar - after all - those that are corrupting the
intent of the statement for their purposes are mobilizing their letter
writers to do this!
Just my little bit of activism sneaking out!
In Health,
Michael
LifeStyles Center
Walker Health Center
(315) 312-5648
July 25, 2001
President George W. Bush
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500
Dear President Bush:
I wanted to take this opportunity to express my satisfaction with the work of
current Surgeon General David Satcher. Dr. Satcher has a long history of
public service where he has worked diligently to move the health of the
American people forward in a most positive direction.
Recently he issued a report concerning sexual health education. I would like
you to know of my immense respect for his inclusion of science-based
information, even in when he was aware of the possible political backlash.
Dr. Satcher has shown how strongly he upholds the Hippocratic Oath to forward
the health of those he serves and does not allow politics to dictate the best
practices for advancing health in our country.
Despite the controversy over comprehensive sexual health education, I would
ask you to support Dr. Satcher. When it comes to the health of the American
people, we may not agree politically, but we should all move forward with the
best-known science, as this benefits not only individuals, but also our
entire country.
I thank you for your time and commitment to public service.
In health,
Michael P. McNeil, MS
Health Promotions Coordinator
Adjunct Faculty, Health Sciences
Chair, American College Health Association
Sub-Committee on Tobacco Intervention & Prevention
cc: Dr. David Satcher
--
Michael P. McNeil, MS
Health Promotions Coordinator
LifeStyles Center, WHC #10
Oswego State University of New York
Oswego, NY 13126
(315) 312-5648 phone
(315) 312-2505 fax
http://www.oswego.edu/services/lifestyles.html
------------------------------
#971
Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2001 06:21:41 -0400
From: Karen Denard Goldman <rlgkdg@FLASH.NET>
Subject: Re: AFA attack on CDC Director
** Visit the American Association for Health Education
** at www.aahperd.org/aahe
**
** The Official Call for Abstracts...
** HEDIR Technolgy Seminar
** http://www.hedir.org/aahe
**
Related to prevention comment and attack on CDC director:
In an upcoming Tools of the Trade in SOPHE's now not so new journal, Health
Promotion Practice, you will find an interesting and very practical tool on
how to communicate risk The Paling Scale. I think, though I may be sorely
off base, that most of us consider ourselves in the risk reduction
business, maybe even more so than prevention given how hard it is to
guarantee anything. I would also refer people to a back issue of Health
Education and Behavior from when it was Health Education Quarterly that was
co-edited by Bernard Goldstein and Audrey Gotsch of the Environmental and
Occupational Health Sciences Institute of UMDNJ and Rutgers University. It
goes back quite some time to maybe the early 1990's and is dedicated to the
topic of risk communication. It was excellent then and well worth
rereading now. I think that as health educators we need to learn more
about how to put risks into perspective and how to communicate that real
risk clearly. Maybe these two tools will help us do that. Then, perhaps
the very careful and scientifically based efforts of organizations like the
CDC, which I consider a veritable national treasure can be better
appreciated. Do others have other risk communication tools to share?
kdg
At 10:31 AM 8/14/01 -0500, Kelley Roy M wrote:
>** Visit the American Association for Health Education
>** at www.aahperd.org/aahe
>**
>** The Official Call for Abstracts...
>** HEDIR Technolgy Seminar
>** http://www.hedir.org/aahe
>**
>
>It is interesting that what some view as an attack, I view as finally the
>results of science being made public. If it is an attack it can only be
>viewed as an attack on philosophy. As a contributor to a unpublished
>manuscript that apparently formed the foundation of the recently release
>from HHS regarding the effectiveness of condoms in preventing STD
>transmission (the individuals with whom I was working were part of the
>panel), I believe it is time that the CDC begin to completely inform those
>people whom it is attempting to assist. As I personally reviewed the
>literature regarding condom effectiveness several years ago, I could only
>come up with two conclusions: 1) either officials at CDC had not reviewed
>the literature before making the statement that "Condoms have been shown
>effective in reducing the risks of STDs" or 2) they had reviewed the
>literature and chose to ignore the findings and thus contributed to the
>proliferation of misinformation that likely resulted in increases in
>incidence of morbidity and mortality as a result of STD infection. It became
>obvious to me that a the recent conclusion of an article published in JAMA
>that, the promotion of condoms as a means of preventing STD infection was
>based philosophy not science, was true. To the degree that officials of CDC,
>such as Dr Jeffery Koplan, were responsible for creating and distributin
>misinformation they should be help responsible.
>
>We as a community of health professionals have not provided our constituents
>with complete information. Daily I deal with students who believe they have
>been taught that condoms have been shown effective in preventing all STDs.
>When confronted with fact that that is not true , they express a variety of
>emotions including anger and feelings of betrayal. I have had several
>students express this thought - Do they not think we are intelligent enough
>to realize that having sex even with a condom is dangerous and to make
>different decisions. Why don't they tell us the truth.
>
>I also think it is helpful to look at the level of acceptable risk from a
>different perspective sometimes. The panel concluded that condom use results
>in a 85% reduction of risk for HIV transmission. Is that acceptable risk?
>Lets say that the airline I plan to use for my next flight has a horrible
>safety record, in fact for a period of time less that one percent of their
>passengers arrive alive. THe majority of people die as a result of their
>behavior of flying on the airline. But the airline has made tremendous
>safety progress an have reduced the risk of death by 85%. Now only 10-15% of
>their passengers die. Would I continue to use that airline. Is a 10-15% risk
>of death good enough? I think not. I would choose a different airline. When
>I do international HIV/AIDS prevention training with teachers, I ask them to
>establish what is an acceptable level of risk for their students, children,
>etc. Teachers and health leaders all over the world will have indicated that
>when dealing with the lives of their students and family, they want a level
>of risk that is better than 99%. Only one out of 100 planes crash. It then
>becomes obvious that condoms do not provide that level of acceptable risk.
>
>Just some of my thought on a beautiful summer day in WI
>
>R. Mark Kelley, Ph.D.
>Assistant Professor & Director
>Graduate School Health Education program
>Department of Health Education and Health Promotion
>209 Mitchell Hall
>La Crosse, WI 54601
>608-785-6791
>608-785-6792(fax)
>kelley.roy@uwlax.edu
>http://www.uwlax.edu/faculty/kelley/
>
>** Advertise Jobs On The HEDIR
>** http://www.hpcareer.net/hedir.cfm
>**
------------------------------