Jones is exasperated.

"I've had a gutsful ...…

FWIW, I think Kim Hill did a good job of interviewing Linda Bryder, who seemed to be thorough and credible, and crucially in the follow-up the week after to test that credibility in interviewing Charlotte Paul, allowing a clear conclusion that Bryder got it very wrong.

You might be right.…

If the rest of the book is as good it's quite damning.

Heard both Sandra Coney and Charlotte Paul discussing/reading their contributions and yes, you're quite right.

And, while Kim Hill has few muffs/stupidities in her portfolio, the interview with Bryder remains one of 'em.

I agree with that, Islander. I have long been a fan and was disappointed in her. Maybe it is too early for a response from The Listener and RNZ? I thought One…

While many of the changes were necessary and overdue, others might be regretted.

Yes, my first thought reading that sentence was "regretted by who exactly?"

While many of the changes were necessary and overdue, others might be regretted.

He doesn't say who is doing the regretting. I can imagine some health care providers such as doctors, anaesthetics etc would much prefer they did not have to treat patients as real people, and explain the procedures…

This book seems to have been a sideline diversion which came up while doing that work.

Reality or spin?

This book seems to have been a sideline diversion which came up while doing that work.

Rather close to questioning integrity?

I'm an academic. It's in my nature to hedge. In the same way Skegg offers up misunderstanding to blunt the possibility of deliberate obfuscation.

And on the Marsden Fund. One of its oddities is that its conflict of interest rules often discount the people best…

coming rather close to questioning integrity

Skegg was generous.

The references to the Marsden Fund and Auckland University Press peer review processes were interesting. Just who were they asking?

I don't know all of them, but one of them was an Australian historian. Only one was in NZ I believe.

And, while I certainly will not pay to read Bryder's book, I am really interested in the publicity machines of both AUP…

Why is that? Is it just considered bad form to publicly discuss each other's research, in case there's a stoush?

I think there is a difference between robust debate about research and coming rather close to questioning integrity:

__"[Bryder's] book's factual errors and selective quotations make it seem more like…

Skegg says far from making significant new discoveries about Green's work and the inquiry it provoked, Bryder has recycled a whole raft of arguments raised around the time of the inquiry, thoroughly discussed, and found to be invalid.
...
"Historians have a professional duty to produce balanced…

That academics would break ranks to publicly criticise another's research is unusual enough, but for a vice-chancellor to do so is almost unprecedented.

Why is that? Is it just considered bad form to publicly discuss each other's research, in case…

Thar she blows!

I'm looking forward to reading the Herald on Saturday

Zounds! Is this the first time a PA villager has declared such a thing?? Better wear gloves. Thanks for letting us know, Kyle.

Cecelia, glad to hear you won that battle. This debate will have extra meaning for you and every…

Reading the…

For the keen, Women's Health Action are advertising a "Cartwright Comes of Age" seminar on 6 November in Auckland – links from their main page, or direct to the PDF flyer and registration form. May…

A social historian can hardly be blamed for misunderstanding scientific evidence, but her book's factual errors and selective quotations make it seem…

And here's a Herald Article: today

While Mantell worked in O&G, cervical cancer was not his research area. It is Jones' research…

This school of thought is clearly misguided.

i totally agree with you Chris.
i cannot see how people can argue that his actions over many years were ethical.

I didn't know Paul Henry was a doctor!

All we need is for Paul Henry to run for The Listener editorship and we'll be sweet. He would have been even more sympathetic to a backlash against feminism and radical stuff than Joanne Black.

I note with interest that Black was…

It's also fascinating that a 20 year old medical enquiry should still provoke such intense reponses.…

Oh yes, ho ho ho. Isn't that moustache-growth amusing?

I didn't know Paul Henry was a doctor!

Whether it's couched in racist or sexist terms -are tales of bullying and intimidation that hard to believe?

Apparently.

On a much less horrifying scale, I read the archived papers of one of the few doctors to prescribe the Pill to unmarried women in NZ in the 60s. He wrote…

My mother's generation of childbirth stories is horrific, with women left unattended for hours, without husbands, or support and then compulsorily anaesthetised.

I can believe this!

My mother-in-law had her first child in 1949 or 50 (would that be National Womens in Auckland?) and she was struck in the face…

No wonder it was possible for my mother-in-law to have her baby swapped, and no one believe her.

Fair dinkum? That would be mind- blowing.

So is telling Russell to take his penis away and be quiet.

For. Fuck's. Sake. It would be really awesome if you could point out exactly where that happened. I'm not holding my breath.

That's perilously close to being on the bingo card, Russell. :)

So is telling Russell to take his penis away and be quiet.

Medical history is fascinating – never too soon or too far away to debate, discuss or revisit. My mother's generation of childbirth stories is horrific, with women left unattended for hours, without husbands, or support and then compulsorily anaesthetised.…

I didn't agree with her anti-mammogram stance at the time. When you are diagnosed with an advanced cancer you tend to want everyone to be screened for lots of cancers wherever possible.

It seems that…

A sidelight: mammography is not, in any way, a perfect – or even especially good – way to screen for breast cancer.

I guess I'm influenced by the fact that a mammogram — and the careful, sometimes distressing but hugely important process that followed — has helped ensure that the…

The "response" from Philllida Bunkle sums up the problem with The Listener's handling of this story. Between Joanne Black's editorialising and Bryder's contributions, Bunkle barely gets a word in. It's a shambles. Both Coney and Bunkle should have been interviewed for the original story.

But…

Finally, in my book I discuss in great detail the claim that Green engages in “unethical research” and show that such a case cannot be sustained.

Compare and contrast with the last two sentences from the…

And if it's so gendered, why are so many of those on the "other" side educated women?

That's perilously close to being on the bingo card, Russell. :)

A system being gendered doesn't mean that all the people on one side are men and the people on the other side…

It's why Russell can't really understand Phillida's anger at her doctor

That's unfair. I didn't find her anger hard to understand, I found her characterisation of what took place hard to credit, even bearing in mind the way women were treated in the system at the time.

Perhaps I'm wrong,…

Letters to the Listener

Worth reading. Can't help but wonder how many had to be left out for space reasons. A clever editor would have put every damn one online.

But the Springbok protesters were doing something *important*. Not just being all humourless and feminist about ladybits

Danielle is right. This is about gender and all that historic stuff about women and bodies, gendered medicine, power, and who does and doesn't have it, It's why Russell can't really understand Phillida's…

The analogy Hilary is drawing is between protest movements, not between injustices or their apologists. Don't Godwin us man!

Oh... I'm still wondering where the point of similarity between Bryder and an apologist for apartheid (let alone a Holocaust denier who has been comprehensively exposed as falsifying data and distorting…

why don't I save everyone some time and compare Bryder to David Irving?

The analogy Hilary is drawing is between protest movements, not between injustices or their apologists. Don't Godwin us man!

Just imagine if someone reviewed the written record around the Springbok tour and came to the conclusion that the Rugby Union and Ron Don had been unfairly treated and the protesters had got it wrong about apartheid. It wouldn't be received reverentially and quietly.

Wow... why don't I save everyone…

What I do have a problem with is with others assuming this is somehow a definitive view – that she is right and others are wrong. It is merely another interpretation, using a particular set of sources with a particular methodology.

I think the debate in the field is going…

Just imagine if someone reviewed the written record around the Springbok tour and came to the conclusion that the Rugby Union and Ron Don had been unfairly treated and the protesters had got it wrong about apartheid. It wouldn't be received reverentially and quietly.

But the Springbok protesters were doing…

I have no problem with Linda Bryder writing her interpretation of the…

Paul seems totally credible

Charlotte Paul has also been the clinical director of the current national cervical screening programme for some time. Must check if she still is.

@Rob — Thanks. I've wasted a bit much time on this, so I'm glad it's been useful.

I certainly wouldn't say your time has been "wasted", James. It's greatly appreciated.

it seems a bit unfair for Coney, Bunkle and Cartwright's howler over the "two groups" — and even given James' useful commentary, it still seems to me a truly terrible mistake — to be deemed irrelevant.

Russell, if you were to listen again to the Paul/Hill interview, in particular at…

Exaggeration, much?

While the sole daily newspaper in New Zealand's largest media market routinely struggles to get its head around the idea that correlation and causation aren't the same, I'd say: Not much.

And if we stoned to death every academic whose work was reduced to BBQ-flavoured FUBAR by the media, their colleagues would be spending more time on funeral leave than anything else.

Exaggeration, much? I can't think of many academics who would publish something without first subjecting it to peer review…

Yes. Historians and other academics do it all the time. You write a paper or book, you present your research at conferences and receive feedback and criticism from your peers. You then publish with confidence.

If you go into left/right field and your conclusions and/or methods don't match stand up…

...Coney, Bunkle and Cartwright's howler over the "two groups"

From Barton's Hearld piece:

Bryder argues that because there were not two groups of patients in a randomised controlled trial, there was no experiment at all, no research component to Green's 1966 proposal for the treatment of CIS.

"It's a complete…

*McIndoe was reviewing Green's cases without permission *One of the reviewers of the McIndoe study wrote: "“This is an important paper. **Dr. Green was the last vocal opponent to the concept…

interspersed fisticuffs

Miles Fairburn actually did throw a punch at someone else at VUW once, I hear... but he was probably 'atomised' at the time. (Nerdy historian joke alert!)

Yes. Historians and other academics do it all the time.

Kyle is totally right. History is basically just a series of long, nuanced arguments.

As I said, Barton's story was worth reading and I fail to see how it was served (let alone improved) by a lead trying to construct a Matheson vs. Bryder cat fight.

I can say with confidence that Bryder's book and people's reactions to it will destroy friendships and lead…

But would there have been any acceptable way for Bryder to nuance the accepted wisdom? I suspect, for some people, no.

I think there could have been an acceptable way to "nuance" it. But actually denying the experiment and rewriting history is akin to climate change denial.

Charlotte Paul said…

if she's going to be bashed for relying on a published account of the number of children Matheson had

This is a little relevant to the topic at hand. I'm not planning to re-listen to the interview, but according to the notes I took, Bryder imho over-emphasised the chance of…

As Danielle notes, the motivation and the current political context seem relevant, even if only to explain the rabid one-sidedness of the Listener. Matheson, Cartwright, Coney and others have been quite deliberately demeaned, and it's part of a larger backlash discourse that is happening largely un-named.

But would there have…

And not because they would have "happened anyway" – that's surely Bryder's most insulting claim.

Actually, tentatively, I'd like to suggest that that might have been Bryder's most credible claim. That is not to discount the fact that the Cartwright enquiry was clearly the catalyst for NZ's change, and especially…

@ChrisW — ... I think yo're misinterpreting McIndoe et al., however.

It wasn't so much my interpretation of McIndoe et al 1984 that I was outlining, but the point that their descriptions of treatments and the retrospective basis of their group assignment for analysis…

But she is annoyed that 21 years after the inquiry into what happened to Matheson and other women at National Women's, a revisionist history is being proposed.

"I am totally sick to think that the character assassination has started all over again. I'm tired…

The alacrity of some to leap on Bryder's book as the evidence long awaited to prove the UE an hysterical exaggeration by feminists gives me the creeps. I don't want to believe it's happening. And I agree with Danielle and…

Wow... so what the hell does all this have to do with the substance (or otherwise) of Bryder's argument, as opposed to dog-whistling that Bryder's a misogynistic skank beating up on an old, sick (but still feisty) lady?

Yeah, i guess the Herald could have just skipped the Real Life…

(I was determined to keep away from the Listener when it changed a few years ago but I enjoy the arts section. Last week had an interesting…

Barton is a feature writer and therefore used to painting word-pictures of interviewees.

And The Herald seems quite fond of reducing complex public policy issues to a 'human interest' sob story where the goodies and baddies are all lined up and clearly labelled, and perhaps we have a right to…

what the hell does all this have to do with the substance (or otherwise) of Bryder's argument, as opposed to dog-whistling that Bryder's a misogynistic skank beating up on an old, sick (but still feisty) lady?

Barton is a feature writer and therefore used to painting word-pictures of interviewees. This…

I'm quite interested in the way that there has been a 'feminist false-consciousness' subtext in the way this story has developed. You know, 'back then all those humourless feminists were just *looking* for stuff to be offended by, but we're all beyond that now'.

That was perhaps the intention of…

The herald article 'An unfortunate revision' is worth reading.

OK, was I the only person who found this frankly embarrasing –

It was the last thing Clare Matheson needed. A new book claiming the "unfortunate experiment" begun in 1966 at National Women's Hospital was neither an experiment, nor unfortunate.

Recovering…

The herald article 'An unfortunate revision' is worth reading. Paul calls Bryder on a couple of misquotes, in terms of what was considered standard treatment in the 60s. It also notes that Bryder was wrong on the number of Clare Matheson's children (her source was Corbett's 1990 newspaper article!).

There's…

This has all happened in the last 20 years as a result of the Cartwright report.

And has made NZ a *terrible, difficult* place to practice, according to an expat MD commenting on the RadioNZ website. I'm afraid my only response there is a resounding boo-fucking-hoo.

I'm quite interested in…

But it does seem likely to me that patient practices were considerably improved in the wake of the Cartwright report.

Russell, this is an understatement. In your recent hospital experience, you would have been addressed by name, had procedures explained to you, had to sign consent, and had Health and…

It might have been better to give independent reviewers a run-up at this one, given the splash made by the two launch interviews.

I understand that, as per standard practice, AUP sent the book out to readers for comment pre-publication. The only NZ academic was a medical expert who helped…

As a general rule, if you've spent an hour typing into a text window on PA System, it is always best to assume that your login could have dropped off, and to just select and copy what you've typed.

It should be better with the upcoming forums upgrade.

The problem…

I just spent an hour preparing a post here with my thoughts on Prof. Bryder's points (as reported) and their implications, submitted it, and subsequently saw a "Page does not exist" screen and the loss of the entire thing. Christ.

Bugger. Although "page does not exist" isn't an error I've…

This is the headline to a very interesting Herald feature this am. I wouldn't have known but read it in a cafe in Kaiwaka!

Serve me right for not waiting for the book to…

So Paul argues rather ...

That part seemed key to me. James, would you consider reviewing the book for us? You have a medical insight the rest of us don't. I'll send it to you asap, if so.

I don't expect you to speed-read it — and I find the…

Then I was shocked when I heard last week's interview. Thank God National Radio has followed it up so well.

Did someone say there was more…

Having listened to Charlotte Paul, I can now confirm the hysterectomy v. other treatment argument. On…

streaming, 44 mins.
MP3, 15MB.
Ogg (but don't expect it every time).

Hi Craig, thanks for not giving me the benefit of the doubt and jumping straight down my throat, it really made my morning.

Oh, tush... I asked a serious question and thanks (really) for the serious and useful answer which clarified a few thing for me. .

(and kudos to Kim Hill for being so well...Kim Hill)

It includes some very well-informed contributors including those who were central to the Cartwright Inquiry, and in implementing the changes since. Also some unimpressed practitioners with different viewpoints as you'd expect.

Seems fair enough really, come back when you've read the book.

Then release the bloody book at the same time you stoke the discussion, not afterwards.

What I thought I said was that there are several types of 'adequate' treatment that were withheld, including cone biopsy and hysterectomy. Cone biopsy is apparently done…

Well, I certainly know a few women who wish they weren't (effectively) bullied into having hysterectomies back in the day because, you know, what the fuck did they know?

Isn't that... kinda the point?

Craig, you expect to be asked for your consent? You mean the doctor has to ask your opinion, not just reassure you in a kindly manner that he knows best so you don't have to worry your pretty little head.

Well, I certainly know a few women who wish they…

You mean the doctor has to ask your opinion, not just reassure you in a kindly manner that he knows best so you don't have to worry your pretty little

I'm so relieved that sentence ended the way it did.

Bryder also makes quite a lot of the fact that Green was denying them an invasive treatment which would impair their child-bearing ability. However, I think she exaggerates the proportion that received hysterectomy in the interview.

James: First, if Bryder is basically pulling numbers out her arse she should be…

Kim Hill will be talking to Charlotte Paul tomorrow after 9:00am, plus there's a load of listener feedback that came in too late to read in air.

I'm going to compile all the feedback and put it on our [[http://radionz.co.nz/saturday…

I thought (contrary to some others here), that the Kim Hill interview was pretty fair. She mostly listened, and some of the things she pushed on I think were fair…

I'm not sure "theoretical" was a put-down. Heslop's article had 1 reference compared to 50 in the other paper.

Funny thing on the number of references – I heard Ian Wishart tell an attentive audience of 200 Gisborne farmers three weeks ago that his book demonstrating that anthropogenic global warming…

In unrelated news, my dictionary confirms my belief that Bryder is pronouncing 'in situ' rong.

"In 1971, Dr Stephen Williams, Pathologist-in-Charge at National Women's Hospital, wrote to Dr George
Wied in Chicago, USA
‘It is unfortunate that our colleague (Green) should have developed an almost obsessional view about the natural history of…

I think there are a couple of issues there for me.
*Bryder specifically mentions the impact of child-bearing on treatment decisions (particularly emphasising that patient 'Ruth' went on to have 4 children). Thus, if one were to explore the impact…

Lancet Oncology, 2008

And so is that! I'm wondering about the idea of 'experiment' in this instance too, James. It seems that Green had particular theories about screening and treatment, which he was following whether anyone else agreed or not.

I am itching to get my hands on that Bryder…

an assessment by two clinicians, Jones and Fitzgerald on NZ's 50 year history of cervical cytology

That is particularly interesting.

Who exactly said that Green's bedside manner was uncommonly good? How many women he treated said that, was the data anonymised, and what was the statistical validity?

Yeah OK. It was mentioned by Bryder in the Kim Hill interview, but I don't think you'll find the data you're looking for…

If any sees or hears Sandra Coney replying to these new accusations please can you let us know.

I'll be more interested in hearing from Charlotte Paul, an Otago epidemiologist who has written and taught a great deal on the subject. Hers is an opinion I've learned to always respect.

But this is obviously anecdotal evidence.

Hilary is right in that the details of the particular 'test case' (there was no ‘experiment’, Green’s bedside manner was uncommonly good by the standards of the day, the approach taken wasn’t out of step with the rest of the world etc) are hardly important.

No no no. The details…

The [[http://www.womens-health.org.nz/index.php?page=cartwright|Women's…

Wikipedia article. Is it accurate?

I had a hysterectomy over 20 years ago and was given a fact sheet from National Women's Hospital. It was written by Bonham or Green and was very patronising – they were taking away the cot but not the playpen etc.

To me there…

Harsh for Green and his family

Understatement. Of. The. Year. My Gran was, to put it mildly, way outside Metro's target demographic but she went out and brought 'The Unfortunate Experiment' issue and followed the Cartwright Inquiry closely. I think it would be a fair precis to say that her…

Harsh for Green and his family, but we’re all benefiting now (even if we could arguably be benefiting even more had it not been for all the misinformation).

Bloody harsh, it would seem.

Christine O'Brien at AUP has been in touch to say that Bryder's book is out of embargo…

But it does seem likely to me that patient practices were considerably improved in the wake of the Cartwright report

.

Yes, like no more routine vaginal swabs of babies, or anaesthetised women being used as training dummies for IUD insertion.

Here is a good summary of the Cartwright report – it's a lot more than just the two groups discussion

Indeed, although some of it is specifically addressed by Bryder in the reports so far (the "world opinion" part, for example).

I'm still not inclined to dismiss the two groups…

And yes, along with Gisborne it's part of larger and ongoing stories about the relationship between health practitioners and consumers; women and political power; evidence,…

Here is a good summary of the Cartwright report – it's a lot more than just the two groups discussion – and there was a conference run by the Auckland…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLEt5E8SfGY

According to Bryder, Coney said so in her own book.

And if Bryder is dumb enough to try pulling a Coulter on that citation her academic career (along with the possibility of being published by a reputable academic press) should be over.

The simple fact that there were never two groups of women, one deliberately under-treated, is enough to confirm that Green was unfairly vilified. That fact is now not in contention, as even Coney acknowledges.

I'm just shaking my head in disbelief (and sadness), that anyone could dismiss that as a…

I find this all a bit odd. Is the consensus now that there was no actual wrongdoing at National Women's?

I'm already way out of my depth too, but Bryder's case that there was no experiment seems sound on the face of it.

Russell you just quoted Cartwright as saying "limited treatment".

Without having read the source material yet, surely that's not a claim of "no" treatment?

It's just that, on the evidence provided by Bryder, it was an invalid way of characterising the group. Group 2 was more likely to develop cancer…

I find this all a bit odd. Is the consensus now that there was no actual wrongdoing at National Women's?

Without having read the source material yet, surely that's not a claim of "no" treatment?

So... it was a group of medical professionals misinforming and undertreating women with cervical issues, some of which eventually led to cancer and death, but it wasn't a 'scientific experiment'.

Danielle, have you read the Listener story and listened to the interview?

The two groups were solely a construction of…