Charles Piller

And so I think the institutions of science need to also be willing to say when mistakes were made, and even if they fear the reputational hit. You know, one really great example has to do with universities. So universities... are filled with every sort of human being.

And when certain doctors, even famous people within the university are found to have engaged in improper activity, misconduct of various kinds, sometimes what you see is universities investigate it, but in an endless way. in an endless secretive way where you don't really ever get to the bottom of it in a public way so that the public is left wondering.

And when certain doctors, even famous people within the university are found to have engaged in improper activity, misconduct of various kinds, sometimes what you see is universities investigate it, but in an endless way. in an endless secretive way where you don't really ever get to the bottom of it in a public way so that the public is left wondering.

And when certain doctors, even famous people within the university are found to have engaged in improper activity, misconduct of various kinds, sometimes what you see is universities investigate it, but in an endless way. in an endless secretive way where you don't really ever get to the bottom of it in a public way so that the public is left wondering.

This, I think, greatly diminishes trust in institutions. There should be a more public process. There should be a way of preserving the right of due process for people who are accused of wrongdoing, the right of due diligence on the part of the organization to look at things carefully.

This, I think, greatly diminishes trust in institutions. There should be a more public process. There should be a way of preserving the right of due process for people who are accused of wrongdoing, the right of due diligence on the part of the organization to look at things carefully.

This, I think, greatly diminishes trust in institutions. There should be a more public process. There should be a way of preserving the right of due process for people who are accused of wrongdoing, the right of due diligence on the part of the organization to look at things carefully.

but also balance that with the need to provide the public with a real explanation for why they should trust the institution. And that's why, in my opinion, some of the problems have to do with independence, the independence of examination of these problems.

but also balance that with the need to provide the public with a real explanation for why they should trust the institution. And that's why, in my opinion, some of the problems have to do with independence, the independence of examination of these problems.

but also balance that with the need to provide the public with a real explanation for why they should trust the institution. And that's why, in my opinion, some of the problems have to do with independence, the independence of examination of these problems.

So when you have a serious set of accusations, for example, in the doctoring of research, it's almost always kicked back to the university, who then secretly look into it for months, sometimes for years, The public never learns of what the result was.

So when you have a serious set of accusations, for example, in the doctoring of research, it's almost always kicked back to the university, who then secretly look into it for months, sometimes for years, The public never learns of what the result was.

So when you have a serious set of accusations, for example, in the doctoring of research, it's almost always kicked back to the university, who then secretly look into it for months, sometimes for years, The public never learns of what the result was.

That's a terrible way to go about it because you've placed the institution that has the most to lose and the least to gain from a robust, rapid public examination of an important issue that the society and their community has a right to know about. You put them in charge of it, and then what do you get? You get more generalized distrust. So when you have people, particularly nowadays, who are...

That's a terrible way to go about it because you've placed the institution that has the most to lose and the least to gain from a robust, rapid public examination of an important issue that the society and their community has a right to know about. You put them in charge of it, and then what do you get? You get more generalized distrust. So when you have people, particularly nowadays, who are...

That's a terrible way to go about it because you've placed the institution that has the most to lose and the least to gain from a robust, rapid public examination of an important issue that the society and their community has a right to know about. You put them in charge of it, and then what do you get? You get more generalized distrust. So when you have people, particularly nowadays, who are...

generally distrustful of public health officials, scientists, public institutions like research institutions and regulatory agencies, and decrying all of their flaws and mistakes, I think often what you have is a symptom of a lack of transparency. You know, when a guy like me has to be the one exposing

generally distrustful of public health officials, scientists, public institutions like research institutions and regulatory agencies, and decrying all of their flaws and mistakes, I think often what you have is a symptom of a lack of transparency. You know, when a guy like me has to be the one exposing

generally distrustful of public health officials, scientists, public institutions like research institutions and regulatory agencies, and decrying all of their flaws and mistakes, I think often what you have is a symptom of a lack of transparency. You know, when a guy like me has to be the one exposing

problems that could have been detected for years and years by responsible institutions, you know you have a problem right off the bat.