Document 1

> > From hgreely@stanford.edu Fri Oct 13 17:05:23 2000
> > Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 09:01:12 -0700
> > From: hank greely 
> > Subject: Re: Yamamano affair


Professor Paul is a historian of science at
> > U. Mass. Boston (though I'm not sure in what field she got her PhD or
> > in what department her department lies).  She has witten about
> > eugenics and is often quite critical of scientists.  The Fix and Long
> > e mails were posted on the MCW-bioethics mailing list by Glenn McGee
> > of Penn.  I don't know anything about Fix other than what the e
> > mail's introduction relates.  I do know Jeff Long (and I assume that
> > many of you do as well).  After reading this, I had some individual
> > correspondence with him on this issue.  He feels from strongly about
> > this.
> >
> > The only thing I would add is that, as important as this issue may
> > appear to the IGES, it is clearly even more important to the American
> > Association of Anthropology, which will have a panel discussion on
> > the subject at its annual meeting later this fall (I'm not sure when)
> > and is likely to have an investigation of its own.  I think that this
> > issue has become part of the ongoing conflicts - which I'm tempted to
> > call a civil (or not so civil) war - in anthropology, largely between
> > physical anthropologists (including molecular anthropologists) and
> > cultural anthropologists. Whatever views of the merits of that
> > conflict IGES members may have, I think any action it takes should
> > not get into that fight.  As far as I can tell, it is the Neel
	> > allegations, both by Tierney (apparently) and by Turner and Sponsel,
> > that affect the IGES; they should be the focus of its response.
> >
> > Hank Greely
> >
> > The Diane Paul E Mail
> >
> > >>>I am trying to write this in-between classes, so it will have the defects
> > >>>of a rush job.  But I know you want to contact the people to whom you
> > >>>forwarded the letter.  So here are a few, brief comments that you are
> > >>>welcome to cite:
> > >>>
> > >>>I am appalled by the letter.  Of course if the claims were true, that
> > >>>would be even more appalling than the fact that apparently respected
> > >>>anthropologists have given their imprimatur to charges whose truth, at
> > >>>least in respect to James Neel, they have clearly made no effort to
> > >>>verify.   Nowhere in the letter is there any acknowledgment that
> > >>>Tierney's claims need to be evaluated.  The irresponsible rush to
> > >>>judgment is made even worse by the fact that Neel died last year and thus
> > >>>can not defend himself from the charges that he a "corrupt and depraved"
> > >>>researcher, who deliberately began a deadly epidemic in order to record
> > >>>the results.
> > >>>
> > >>>I can not know that all of Tierney's charges are untrue.  But I do know
> > >>>that at least some of them are on the face of it implausible, while some
> > >>>others are demonstrably false.  To be concrete:
> > >>>
> > >>>The charge that Neel held "extreme eugenic theories" - indeed, was a
> > >>>proponent of "fascistic eugenics" - is bizarre.  I hardly know where to
> > >>>begin here.  Let me just say that if we are considering human geneticists
> > >>>of his generation, he is on the (other) extreme of a continuum; for
> > >>>example, he consistently argued against directiveness in genetic
> > >>>counseling.  Whether someone is a "eugenicist" depends on what one means
> > >>>by this very protean term.  But at a minimum, one can say that Neal
> > >>>always considered himself and was considered by others to be a critic of
> > >>>eugenics, and that there were very good reasons for this.  (See Daniel
> > >>>Kevles's IN THE NAME OF EUGENICS).
> > >>>
> > >>>The treatment of AEC funding is shockingly de-contextualized.  In some
> > >>>subfields of biology, the AEC funded most researchers  - including
> > >>>vehement critics of the AEC, such as H.J. Muller.  (John Beatty has
> > >>>written extensively on AEC funding in biology;  Richard Lewontin, who was
> > >>>also funded by the AEC, provides a useful more personalized history in
> > >>>the book edited by Chomsky and others titled [approximately] THE COLD WAR
> > >>>AND THE UNIVERSITIES).  The implication that anyone funded by the AEC
> > >>>must be up to something bad is ridiculous.
> > >>>
> > >>>But then there are the outright misstatements of fact:
> > >>>
> > >>>The letter-writers refer to Neal's "obdurate silence, until his death in
> > >>>February, as to why he carried out the vaccination program in the first
> > >>>place."  In fact, Neal wrote about this at length in his autobiography,
> > >>>PHYSICIAN TO THE GENE POOL, published by Wiley in 1994 (and perhaps
> > >>>elsewhere).  In the autobiography, the measles episode is linked to an
> > >>>explicitly *anti-racist* argument; i.e. Neel denies that Europeans can
> > >>>get morally off the hook by claiming that these populations would have
> > >>>anyway succumbed to contact diseases.  How do Tierney et al. explain the
> > >>>inconsistency between Neal's supposed motives and the points he actually
> > >>>makes regarding the episode?
> > >>>
> > >>>In what is perhaps the most inflammatory charge, the authors claim that
> > >>>"members of the research team refused to provide any medical assistance
> > >>>to the sick and dying Yanomami, on explicit orders from Neel."  That
> > >>>claim is contradicted by Neel's papers, which are housed at the American
> > >>>Philosophical Society (APS).  It would seem that Tierney must not have
> > >>>consulted Neel's papers in researching his ostensibly "well-documented"
> > >>>book.
> > >>>
> > >>>According to the letter-writers, "He [Neel] never informed the
> > >>>appropriate organs of the Venezuelan government that his group was
> > >>>planning to carry out a vaccination campaign, as he was legally required
> > >>>to do."  That is also untrue,  as his papers at the APS document.
> > >>>
> > >>>A small point: According to the authors, "there is no record that Neel
> > >>>sought any medical advice before applying the vaccine."  Neal was a
> > >>>physician as well as Ph.D. geneticist - why should he have sought medical
> > >>>advice?
> > >>>
> > >>>I need to stop here.  Hopefully, this will suffice to show that there are
> > >>>at least reasons for skepticism.  Unfortunately, by now many, many people
> > >>>have heard or read the charges, which will certainly continue to
> > >>>circulate in cyberspace.  Even if Neel were to be "officially"
> > >>>vindicated, mud would doubtless stick.  What a sickening way to do
> > >>>business!
> > >>>
> > >>>All best, Diane
> > >>>
> >
> > * * *
> >

> > The Alan Fix and Jeff Long E mails (with the "editorial comments"
> > from Glenn McGee of Penn's Bioethics Center.)  (The first response,
> > to which the Fix e mail is second,  is the Susan Lindee e mail, which
> > apparently is available on the web site.)
> >
> > The second response is from Alan G. Fix (Professor of Anthropology,
> > University of California, Riverside, CA 92521):
> >
> > The letter by Turner and Sponsel regarding alleged wrongdoing by James V.
> > Neel has now circulated through numerous listserves. Since I have some
> > knowledge of Neel's work, I feel that some response to this document should
> > be made. Clearly, a complete examination of the charges must be made and
> > perhaps the AAA forum is the place to do that. In the meantime, several
> > misinterpretations and mistakes are evident from the letter and can be
> > corrected from the published writings of Neel and others and some
> > understanding of how this kind of science works. First, Neel indeed was
> > supported by the AEC, which was the successor to the Manhattan Engineering
> > Project. This is not necessarily sinister. Evaluating genetic damage done by
> > the A bombs in Japan was a critical concern. Neel and his colleagues did
> > that over many years. It should be stressed that this was OBSERVATIONAL work
> > rather than experiment (this work as well as the Native American study is
> > related in detail in Neel's scientific autobiography, "Physician to the Gene
> > Pool", Wiley, 1994). A major interest in this work was estimating increased
> > rates of mutation in the survivors of the bombing. Although the Yanomama
> > project had much broader goals, the AEC continued to fund this work based on
> > the idea that these populations would allow him to estimate mutation rates
> > (mainly by looking at socalled "private polymorphisms" not shared by others
> > and thought thereby to be recent mutations.). While it is possible that
> > strange experiments were being performed, there is no necessary connection
> > between the AEC funding and such "obsessed fascism".  Another example of
> > emotive anecdote with no substance: Roche is claimed to have injected
> > radioactive substances in individuals. It seems he did, but of course this
> > is the procedure routinely used to check thyroid function.
> > Radio iodine concentrates in the thyroid and can be measured. Goitre can be
> > a big problem in interior populations and was a concern for the biomedical
> > team. The analogy would be like saying that those xraying the Semai (in
> > Malaysia, where I have experience) for TB were genocidal! Of course he did
> > blood tests -- this is evil?? I have no knowledge of the measles vaccine
> > that is purported to be so inappropriate (Neel was an MD and a member of a
> > medical school faculty I can't understand how he would have used such a
> > vaccine). However, the supposed compelling theoretical rationale for causing
> > the epidemic is totally bogus. This story is contrary to all of Neel's
> > reasoning. Simply reading Neel's published work allows us to evaluate theory
> > and belief (if not the facts of practice). Neel was not a eugenicist (read
> > his chapters in "Physician" he follows Joshua Lederberg in talking of
> > "euphenics" change the environment to optimize human genetic potentials). If
> > he wished to make a eugenic prescription for the human population, it should
> > be here. It seems likely that the classic "geneticist=eugenicist" equation
> > is being invoked but this is no longer true -- almost no geneticists are
> > eugenicists (though many were in the early years of the last century).
> > Worse, the idea that he thought there was a gene for dominance is wrong IF
> > there was genetic variance associated with the qualities of headmanship,
> > then that would indeed by passed by highly polygynous guys, but Neel never
> > claimed that it was simple. The story gets even weirder...Neel is faulted
> > for NOT believing that resistance was
> > genetic -- how does this make him a eugenicist? His point was that excess
> > mortality resulted from the breakdown of social support during epidemics:
> > nobody to get water, feed the kids, etc. when everybody is sick. Thus the
> > claimed eugenicist is in fact claiming that high mortality in these
> > populations is environmental. The crucial point is that there would be no
> > value for Neel's theory in performing this "experiment" whatever its
> > outcome. The social pattern that Neel saw as critical to Yanomama
> > population structure did feature polygyny and differential reproduction by
> > headmen but that was only part of his view. Many other aspects such as the
> > "fissionfusion" pattern that were not tied to "big man" politics were also
> > addressed. Granted he was interested in the effects that this had on the
> > gene pool but if that's evil... I could go on but hopefully the point has
> > been made. The sinister claims may be overdone. It is worth waiting and
> > seeing before judging this work. Again, whatever the truth of any claim of
> > the Tierney book, this letter is scary. Where "probable truth emerges by
> > inference", I cringe. Phrases  like "malicious and perverted research" where
> > the actual evidence (at least that cited in the Turner/Sponsel letter) is
> > terribly weak and the misinterpretation of Neel's theories is obvious is
> > McCarthyism of the classic sort. I also fear for anthropologynot because of
> > Neel's work but because of exactly the kind of selfrighteous prejudice
> > represented in the T/S letter. It is important to find whether evil was done
> > but character assassination is evil itself.
> > *****
> > The third response is from Jeffrey C. Long, Ph.D. (Chief, Section on
> > Population Genetics and Linkage, Laboratory of Neurogenetics/NIAAA, National
> > Institutes of Health, Park Bldg. V, Room 451, MSC 8110, 12420 Parklawn Dr.,
> > Bethesda, MD 208928110):
> >
> > I was a student in the Department of Human Genetics at Michigan. Peter
> > Smouse was my advisor but Dr. Neel was on my Ph.D. committee and was a
> > mentor to me for the entire time I was a student at Michigan. Here are my
> > thoughts. To me, Dr. Neel is a continuing model for scientific integrity. I
> > grieved when he recently passed away and it is painful for me to read
> > something like this. I was a student in the Human Genetics Department from
> > 1979-1984 and the data collection on the Yanomama project was completed by
> > this time. I have no direct knowledge about what happened. Nonetheless, it
> > is inconceivable to me that Dr. Neel would be accused of harming human
> > subjects to advance his research or theories. I believe that much of Dr.
> > Chagnon's work and ideas were/are independent of Dr. Neel. I know that by
> > 1979 Drs. Neel and Chagnon were already estranged. I cannot comment on Dr.
> > Chagnon because he was pretty much out of the picture at Michigan by the
> > time that I got there, but it has never seemed to me that Dr. Chagnon was an
> > hapless instrument carrying out Dr. Neel's research program. It is true that
> > the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) and its successor the Department of
> > Energy (DOE) funded research at Michigan and Dr. Neel studied mutation and
> > the mutagenic properties of radiation. It is also true that Dr. Neel
> > followed up the genetic consequences of the Japanese atomic bomb blasts.
> > These are topics that are important to the interface of genetics, health,
> > and society. It is important to note that he documented the consequences to
> > those who had been exposed to radiation but he did not expose individuals to
> > radiation.
> >
> > Dr. Neel did observe a 'virgin soil' measles epidemic in the Yanomama. There
> > were other nonIndians (including missionaries, traders, etc.) among the
> > Yanomama at the time of the epidemic. Earlier accounts hold that the
> > epidemic originated with measles in the child of a missionary. This is sound
> > from an epidemiological perspective because at the time most adults in
> > Europe and the United States were immune to measles by virtue of childhood
> > exposure. I really cannot give the details of treatments and vaccines
> > delivered by the Michigan team. However, it is worth noting that Dr. Neel
> > was a physician and that he regarded his role as a physician every bit as
> > seriously as he regarded his role as a scientist. He was also well aware of
> > the difference between these roles. He was able to provide a qualified
> > medical opinion! His view on the spread of measles was novel and challenged
> > the prevailing wisdom of the 1960s and 1970s but he developed it to explain
> > what he saw. Up until that time, scientists had attributed the decimation by
> > disease of newly contacted people to their lack of supposed protective
> > genes. However, Dr. Neel noted that in the 'virgin soil' context nobody in a
> > village was immune by virtue of previous exposure and because of this
> > everyone became sick at once. This placed a far greater burden on everyday
> > life. Moreover, he noted that the cultural response to the unknown disease
> > facilitated its spread because people fled from areas where the disease was
> > occurring to those areas where the disease had yet to appear. All of this
> > added up to the fact that it is unnecessary to postulate genetic inferiority
> > in order to explain the severe response of uninitiated populations to novel
> > pathogens. I recommend his paper on the incident and its ramifications (JV
> > Neel et al. (1970) Notes on the effect of measles and measles vaccine in a
> > virginsoil population of South American Indians. Am J Epidemiol. 91:41829).
> > Dr. Neel studied the Yanomama and other unacculturated populations because
> > he thought that their population
> > structure was relevant to understanding genetic variation in all human
> > populations. He felt that the population structure of cosmopolitan
> > populations was too recent to be reflected in our gene pools and that human
> > polymorphism would not be adequately represented by extrapolation of the
> > genetic consequences of cosmopolitan population structure. He also thought
> > that changes in ociety and technology would change the adaptive value of
> > many traits. This is reflected at many instances in his work but I think it
> > is well represented in his paper on diabetes (Neel JV(1962) Diabetes
> > mellitus: A "thrifty" genotype rendered detrimental by "progress"? Am J Hum
> > Genet 14: 353362). James V. Neel was interested in genes and social
> > structure but he did not advocate a eugenic plan or purpose while I was a
> > student at Michigan. I can't imagine that there was a time that he did. Dr.
> > Neel published over 200 papers and review of his record shows that his work
> > on humans was observational and not directly experimental. Many
> > nonclassified research programs received funding from the AEC and DOE.
> > AEC/DOE funding does not establish guilt by association. In fact, the
> > current Human Genome Project has a major DOE component and all of the data
> > being collected is publicly available. Remember also that the AEC and DOE
> > were not and are not part of the Department of Defense (DOD). In fact, there
> > was a Human Genetics Department policy against receiving DOD funds.
> >
> > Dr. Neel openly acknowledged AEC and DOE funding in every paper that
> > reported on research funded by these agencies. To the best of my knowledge
> > his research wasn't carried out in secret. Certainly a student would not
> > know all of his professor's activities but there was an unparalleled
> > openness in the Department of Human Genetics at Michigan. I get nostalgic
> > thinking about it. Try to imagine this, there were only two keys in the
> > entire department: one was to the front door of the building and the other
> > opened the library and every laboratory and office in the Department. Anyone
> > (who dared) could have walked into Dr. Neel's office and helped themselves.
> > To my knowledge, nobody ever did. It would have been too much of a breach of
> > honor. In addition to this, Dr. Neel always worked with his door wide open a
> > model for everyone to see. He was always there, early mornings, evenings,
> > and weekends. His behavior and policies did not bear the stamp of
> > clandestine activities. Of course I have not yet read Patrick Tierney's
> > expose but it seems to me that it should be viewed with caution. I fear that
> > it will be slanted and sensational and appeal to ignorance and paranoia.
> > James V. Neel stands accused but he is denied by his death and the timing of
> > Tierney's release of the right to defend himself. It is our responsibility
> > to remember that one is presumed innocent until proven guilty.
> > Jeffrey Long

Document 2

> >>Subject: James V. Neel Asociated Press wire
> >>Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 15:28:15 -0400
> >>
> >>
> >>BC-Genocidal Scientist?, Adv14-15, 1st Ld-Writethru, b0771,2348
> >>$Adv14-15
> >>For release in Weekend Editions, Oct. 14-15, and thereafter
> >>`Father of Human Genetics' falsely accused
> >>Eds: UPDATES throughout with new material, including additional
> >>quote from measles expert, comments from publisher, further
> >>substantiations of vaccine's safety. No pickup.
> >>AP Photos NY336-338 of Oct. 12
> >>By MATT CRENSON
> >>AP National Writer
> >>  NEW YORK (AP) - Obituaries painted a glowing portrait of James
> >>V. Neel - "father of human genetics," winner of top academic
> >>honors, a scholar universally respected by his peers.
> >>  Eight months later, a man who barely knew Neel is accusing him
> >>of killing many hundreds of people in a reckless medical
> >>experiment.
> >>  A new book by author and anthropologist Patrick Tierney alleges
> >>that in 1968, Neel caused a catastrophic measles epidemic by
> >>inoculating South American Indians with a dangerous vaccine. The
> >>charge is made in advance copies of a book scheduled to be released
> >>Nov. 16 by W.W. Norton & Co.
> >>  The accusation is almost certainly false.
> >>  Leading epidemiologists interviewed by the AP believe that what
> >>Neel is accused of is scientifically impossible.
> >>  Additionally, one expert Tierney relied upon in his book said
> >>the author misquoted him as saying the vaccine could have caused an
> >>epidemic.
> >>  "He took what I said out of context," said Mark Papania, a
> >>measles expert at the federal Centers for Disease Control and
> >>Prevention. "There is no evidence that it would be possible for
> >>that vaccine to cause an epidemic."
> >>  Thursday, a representative of the publisher offered no defense
> >>of the book's account and said the final version would correct any
> >>mistakes.
> >>  People who knew Neel say he would never have done anything
> >>immoral in the pursuit of science. "All I can tell you," said
> >>Peter Smouse, a Rutgers University professor and former student of
> >>Neel's, "is that's not the Jim Neel I know."
> >>  In a six-decade career, Neel won a National Medal of Science and
> >>a Lasker Award, biology's most prestigious prize short of the
> >>Nobel. He belonged to the National Academy of Sciences. Francis
> >>Collins, director of the Human Genome Project and a scientific
> >>titan in his own right, has called Neel "father of the field of
> >>human genetics."
> >>  Although he was a physician specializing in human heredity, Neel
> >>often worked closely with anthropologists, whose field is notorious
> >>for extreme ideologies and massive egos. Anthropologists regularly
> >>accuse one another of bending reality to match theory, disrupting
> >>native cultures and violating the human rights of those they study.
> >>  The charges have been especially acrimonious among scholars of
> >>the Yanomami, a tribe in the remote Amazon highlands of Venezuela
> >>and Brazil.
> >>  Neel had only occasional contact with the Yanomami and those who
> >>study them. Even so, those brief encounters now threaten his
> >>reputation at a time when he can no longer defend himself.
> >>  ---
> >>  Neel, a professor of human genetics, met Napoleon Chagnon, an
> >>anthropology student, at the University of Michigan in 1963.
> >>  Chagnon was preparing to do research in the Amazon, but this was
> >>no pint-sized project to help a beginning researcher get his feet
> >>wet. In the early 1960s, the Yanomami were considered a Stone Age
> >>remnant cut off from civilization, offering a rare opportunity to
> >>study culture in its primitive state.
> >>  Nearly 40 years later, Chagnon's studies of the Yanomami are
> >>legendary; he is arguably the most famous living anthropologist. He
> >>is also a primary villain in Tierney's book, "Darkness in El
> >>Dorado: How Scientists and Journalists Devastated the Amazon."
> >>  Tierney accuses Chagnon and others of orchestrating ceremonial
> >>events for the benefit of documentary filmmakers, pitting Yanomami
> >>villages against one another and abetting a corrupt plan to turn
> >>the Yanomami homeland over to gold mining companies. These are old
> >>accusations that have been debated in anthropology circles for
> >>years.
> >>  However, one chapter introduces a new allegation, suggesting
> >>that Chagnon collaborated with Neel in deadly experiments.
> >>  The book strongly implies the vaccine Neel used caused a measles
> >>epidemic but is vague about whether the researchers intended to
> >>spread the disease.
> >>  In a shortened version published in the Oct. 9 issue of The New
> >>Yorker, Tierney stopped short of accusing researchers of causing
> >>the outbreak but declared, "I determined that the course of the
> >>epidemic closely tracked the movements of Neel's team."
> >>  On Thursday, a Norton representative appeared to back off the
> >>accusation made in the book, saying it was unfair to judge the work
> >>based on pre-publication copies and that the final version would
> >>correct any mistakes.
> >>  "What we sent out, of course, is an uncorrected proof," said
> >>Louise Brockett, W.W. Norton director of publicity. One reason
> >>publishers send them out is "so we can address things like that."
> >>  She said that The New Yorker article reflects how the subject
> >>will be handled in the final version.
> >>  Tierney, the author, did not respond to interview requests.
> >>  The National Book Foundation Wednesday nominated "Darkness in
> >>El Dorado" for a National Book Award although the selection
> >>committee did not see a final version.
> >>  The accusation against Neel in pre-publication copies of the
> >>book has had a tremendous impact.
> >>  When anthropologists Terry Turner of Cornell University and
> >>Leslie Sponsel of the University of Hawaii, both of whom appear as
> >>sources in the book, read "Darkness in El Dorado," they
> >>immediately sent a four-page e-mail to the president of the
> >>American Anthropological Association.
> >>  "We write to inform you of an impending scandal," their
> >>message began. "In its scale, ramifications and sheer criminality
> >>and corruption it is unparalleled in the history of anthropology."
> >>  The message leaked and was widely circulated several weeks ago.
> >>Turner said it was meant to inform authorities about Tierney's
> >>claims, not support them. But some of the e-mail's passages seemed
> >>to suggest otherwise, referring to "startling revelations" and
> >>"convincing evidence."
> >>  Chagnon, who declined to discuss "Darkness in El Dorado,"
> >>sounded almost weary in a brief statement responding to the e-mail.
> >>  "Tierney, Turner and Sponsel have repeatedly accused me of some
> >>of these things in the past, both in print and verbally in public
> >>anthropology meetings," he wrote. "This is just a more elaborate
> >>extension of their long vendetta against me."
> >>  The fighting began in 1968, when Chagnon's book about his time
> >>among the Yanomami came out. It depicted them as people prone to
> >>gang rape, wife-beating, ritual battle and murder. It chronicled
> >>Chagnon's experiences as a swashbuckling adventure full of close
> >>encounters with jaguars and attempts on the young man's life.
> >>  "Yanomamo: The Fierce People" remains required reading in many
> >>freshman anthropology classes and has sold more than 1 million
> >>copies.
> >>  In academia, such success often leads to notoriety. Other
> >>anthropologists fiercely disputed Chagnon's description of the
> >>Yanomami, claiming that any violence he observed was a reaction to
> >>his own aggression. They accused Chagnon of making up data and
> >>pitting neighbors against one another for his own purposes.
> >>  Chagnon responded with belligerence, shouting at opponents at
> >>scientific meetings and labeling them with epithets like
> >>"Marxist" and "leftist."
> >>  Not long before the winds of controversy began to whirl around
> >>Chagnon, Neel recruited the young anthropologist for an Amazon
> >>expedition.
> >>  Neel had done famous studies of atomic bomb survivors in
> >>Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and now the Atomic Energy Commission was
> >>giving him money to study the opposite end of the spectrum of
> >>radiation exposure - a remote tribe that had never seen an X-ray
> >>machine, much less drunk milk contaminated by fallout from bomb
> >>tests.
> >>  Chagnon's value to Neel's expedition was his ability to get
> >>information from the Yanomami. The genetic studies required not
> >>just blood samples but genealogies of a people that kept no written
> >>records. To make things more difficult, the Yanomami consider it
> >>taboo to speak one another's names.
> >>  Chagnon's solution showed characteristic gusto. He visited
> >>neighbors who were on bad terms with the group he was interested
> >>in, and got the genealogical information from them. Then he
> >>confirmed it by going back to the people he was studying and
> >>telling them the names he had collected. When they got belligerent,
> >>he figured he had good information.
> >>  In addition to the AEC research, Neel had his own reasons to
> >>study the Yanomami.
> >>  Ever since Columbus' expeditions, it had been known that
> >>"virgin populations" of American Indians were especially
> >>vulnerable to European diseases such as smallpox and measles. Most
> >>scientists believed that over millennia of isolation from such
> >>afflictions, American Indians had lost the genetic wherewithal to
> >>survive them.
> >>  Neel disagreed, arguing that a dozen millennia or so isn't
> >>enough time for a people to lose whole sets of genes. He believed
> >>isolation from European diseases had merely created a precarious
> >>epidemiological situation.
> >>  Before vaccinations made childhood diseases such as measles rare
> >>in industrialized nations, immunity came only from exposure.
> >>Although many children became sick, few died, and survivors grew to
> >>adulthood with immunity. When their own children fell ill, they
> >>could provide care without becoming sick themselves.
> >>  But in isolated Indian populations, no one was immune because no
> >>one had been exposed. Young and old alike fell ill, leaving almost
> >>nobody upright to feed and nurse the sick. That, Neel believed, was
> >>what turned a usually nonfatal disease into a mass killer.
> >>  Neel wanted to test his idea by vaccinating 2,000 Yanomami
> >>against measles, then come back a few years later to measure their
> >>immune response to the vaccine, said Ryk Ward, an Oxford University
> >>professor who went to Venezuela with Neel that year as a University
> >>of Michigan postdoctoral researcher.
> >>  If the Yanomami were genetically different from Europeans, their
> >>new measles antibodies would differ from those generated by
> >>immunized Caucasians. If the Yanomami were not genetically
> >>different, their antibodies would be indistinguishable.
> >>  In pre-publication copies of his book, Tierney described Neel's
> >>plan as a dangerous experiment on uninformed subjects. He argued
> >>that the vaccine Neel selected, Edmonston B, may have been too
> >>potent for the Yanomami and could have actually given them the
> >>disease.
> >>  Epidemiologists interviewed by the AP scoffed at Tierney's claim
> >>that the vaccine could have caused the measles outbreak among the
> >>Yanomami.
> >>  Essentially a weakened form of the wild measles virus, the
> >>Edmonston B vaccine is no picnic. It usually causes several days of
> >>the same fever and rash as a case of the measles.
> >>  But what it cannot do, the experts insisted, is spread among
> >>people or kill them. During its development, the vaccine was
> >>specifically shown not to cause the severe coughing and congestion
> >>that can transmit measles.
> >>  Of the millions of people who received Edmonston B, only three
> >>ever died as a result, according to Samuel Katz, a professor
> >>emeritus at Duke University who helped develop the vaccine. All
> >>three had severely compromised immune systems. Two were receiving
> >>chemotherapy for leukemia. The third had AIDS.
> >>  By 1968, most doctors had replaced the Edmonston B with a milder
> >>vaccine, but it was by no means obsolete. It was given to 1 million
> >>children in the United States that year. Neel chose it, his
> >>defenders said, because the immunological response to it was
> >>well-documented, making it easier to compare to the Indians'
> >>reaction.
> >>  Field scientists live in a world far removed from the brightly
> >>lit bench tops of their laboratory peers. They cannot control or
> >>repeat their experiments. They must adapt to whatever nature throws
> >>at them.
> >>  In February 1968, what nature threw at Neel and his colleagues
> >>was a raging measles epidemic, Ward said.
> >>  It was a disheartening coincidence, he said. The Yanomami, never
> >>exposed to measles before, were dropping like flies just weeks
> >>before the researchers had intended to vaccinate some of them.
> >>  "For the next two or three weeks," he said, "we tried to head
> >>off the measles epidemic the best we could" by inoculating
> >>hundreds of Yanomami with Edmonston B.
> >>  "If I were there at that time in those villages," said
> >>Papania, the CDC measles expert, "I would have used it."
> >>  But it wasn't enough. By the time the epidemic had run its
> >>course, many villages had lost 20 percent to 30 percent of their
> >>inhabitants. Nobody knows how many Yanomami died in more
> >>inaccessible regions.
> >>  Later tests showed that both Yanomami who had been vaccinated
> >>and others who had caught measles produced an antibody response
> >>identical to that of a typical Caucasian.
> >>  Neel's hypothesis, it appears, was correct.
> >>  ---
> >>  Today his scientific legacy is in danger of being overshadowed
> >>by controversy.
> >>  In 1968, Neel couldn't have known that a junior member of his
> >>team would soon become one of anthropology's most notorious
> >>scholars. And there is no evidence that he knew the Atomic Energy
> >>Commission, which funded his 1968 South America trip and some of
> >>his other research, had been conducting unethical human
> >>experiments.
> >>  Only recently have news reports revealed that the agency studied
> >>radiation in the 1950s and 1960s by feeding radioactive oatmeal to
> >>retarded boys in Massachusetts and exposing U.S. troops to nuclear
> >>weapons tests in Nevada.
> >>  In pointing out that much of Neel's research was funded by the
> >>AEC, Tierney's book implies it is part of the same shameful legacy.
> >>  Neel's real problem may lie in the company he kept.
> >>  ---
> >>  On the Net:
> >>  American Anthropological Association:
> >>www.ameranthassn.org
> >>  UC-Santa Barbara Anthropology Department:
> >>www.anth.ucsb.edu
> >>  End Adv for Weekend Editions Oct. 14-15
> >>
> >>  (Copyright 2000 by The Associated Press.  All Rights Reserved.)
> >>

1. Home
2. Back
3. Top
4. Document1
5. Document2