I am talking about defamation in the world of science that can threaten our health, our environment and our future as species.
Defamation attempts often happen when folks hear conclusions, news or facts with which they disagree - regardless of the validity of the science behind such data or information.
To me, those widespread defamation attempts only make matters worse.
They make it less likely that the world will ever hear the complete truth about anything. And that could mean disaster if we're talking about a topic as serious as the collapse of of our civilization or the demise of the human species.
Today I will cite two scientific defamation cases with which I am familiar.
In the first case, I have known the scientist since 2005, served on his foundation's board for six years and have personally witnessed some of the defamation he has suffered.
I also know that throughout the world there has been an abundance of clinical validation of his chronic disease reversing nutritional science that he has pursued for most of his career.
In the second case, the scientist and I spoke at the same Orlando conference in 2016 and have had occasional email and phone contact since then.
I should also say that although I don't have any reason to challenge his scientific work, I sincerely hope that he is wrong about most of his conclusions.
1. The case of Dr. T. Colin Campbell
. After earning his BS at Penn State, he went on to earn his Masters and PhD in nutritional biochemistry at Cornell University. After career stints at M.I.T. and Virginia Tech, he returned to Cornell as a full tenured professor (at age 40) in the Division of Nutritional Sciences.
While at Virginia Tech in 1968, he made two independent observations about the world's most feared disease - two discoveries that would change the entire trajectory of his career. In both cases, there appeared to be a strong correlation between the consumption of animal protein and cancer growth.
Having been raised on a dairy farm himself, he found that apparent correlation to be unfathomable, bordering on heresy. But as a scientist with integrity, he knew that he must carefully investigate all possibilities.
Systematically searching for the truth about this horrible disease over the next twenty years, he conducted dozens of studies with experimental animals in the labs of Virginia Tech and Cornell - and continued to get the same alarming results.
This is what he told me about those findings in the summer of 2016:
The evidence for me was abundantly convincing in 1983 that animal protein plays a major role in the growth of cancer in animals, and most-likely in humans.
T. Colin Campbell, PhD
It is now thirty-six years later, yet because of the insidious defamation of Campbell and his work by the animal food industry and his own alma mater,
there has never been a single clinical trial in humans
for the purpose of testing his alarming findings about the simple, promising possibility of having discovered the elusive cure for cancer.
What a tragedy for all of humanity! Could a legitimate cure for the world's most feared disease simply be a matter of replacing meat, dairy and eggs in the diet with broccoli, beans and apples?
We still don't know the scientific answer yet, but there is an abundance of anecdotal evidence that suggests that it is.
Meanwhile, regarding cancer, things have only gotten worse for Dr. Campbell and for the global public. A subtle, never-ending, defamation campaign has sullied his reputation at Cornell while all of humanity has missed out on a genuine possibility of a near cancer-free world.
Want to know more about this infuriating story? We documented Colin's arduous journey in a draft chapter of a book about the "cancer industry" that I wrote with
Dr. John Kelly
in 2016. Here's a link to that chapter.
2. The Case of Dr. Guy McPherson. After earning his bachelors degree in Forest Resources from the University of Idaho in 1982, he went on to earn a Masters and PhD in Range Science from Texas Tech a few years later.
Since then, he has held various roles in environmental studies at the University of Georgia, Texas A&M and at Cal-Berkeley before becoming a full professor in the School of Renewable Natural Resources at the University of Arizona in the year 2000.
Along the way, he became very interested in climate change, conducted extensive independent research for over a decade and ultimately concluded around 2010 that, because of the loss of habitat, the human species would likely go extinct before 2030.
Also, around 2010, the administration at the University of Arizona concluded that his disturbing findings about climate change were simply too volatile to share with undergrads. But, since Guy was
a tenured professor, they were unable to terminate him - so they decided to just
relieve him of his teaching duties. He then chose to resign and still retains the title of professor emeritus.
Alarming information to be sure, but we must consider the possibility that he could be right about his conclusions. If you check carefully, his
overall body of work
suggests that he could be one of the best-informed scientists on the planet when it comes to species extinction.
As for evidence of McPherson's knowledge, his website features a
Climate Change Update
consisting of about 32,000 words and including almost 800 links to peer-reviewed papers that contribute to his ultimate conclusion that the Anthropocene is about to end - and that there's nothing we can do about it.
Confident in the veracity of his dire conclusions, he stopped posting new information on that climate update page in 2016.
All of which begs a couple of questions:
Who am I, an engineer, to say that Dr. McPherson is wrong about his scientific conclusions? And what right does the notable climate scientist Dr. Michael Mann have to refer to him as a "doomist cult hero?"
We can only hope that McPherson's audacious stance on this most serious of all topics will attract a more robust examination by many other scientists regarding what's truly at stake with climate change and the likelihood of human survival.
Looking on the bright side, maybe McPherson's legacy will be that, while not popular for his doom and gloom predictions, his extensive research on the topic may soon prompt more mainstream scientists and prominent leaders to jump into the fray and urgently begin taking bold action to save our habitat while we still have time.
In fact, it has been my observation since I started following his work in 2016, that much of the rhetoric I am hearing from "mainstream" science has moved in the direction of the McPherson conclusions. Even the ultra-conservative IPCC has called for
urgent action to fight climate change
, saying that we have less than twelve years to get this done.
Having said that, it's also my observation that most of those other scientists have not completely given up on our chances for survival. Neither have I.
The Bottom Line.
The world is a better place because of the work of the two scientists featured here today - despite the fact that neither of their bodies of work have been embraced or honored by the institutions where they pursued scientific truths that ended up turning much of the world against them.
Because of their work:
- The world is much more likely to move rapidly to a sustainable plant-based diet and perhaps someday will embrace the elusive cure for cancer and other chronic diseases that whole, plant-based foods can deliver.
- We have a much better idea of the monstrous effort that will be required to reinvent the way humans live - soon enough, and to the extent necessary, to give our species a fighting chance to survive and thrive not only past 2030, but for many millennia to come.
On a personal note, without the information that I have gleaned from their bodies of work, I would probably have never concluded that we must take drastic action such as the GRATOLA idea of completely reinventing the way humans live and interact with nature on this planet.
I will end this S.O.S. Memo with a comment regarding the chilling danger of shooting the messengers or participating in their defamation.
We may not always like what the messengers say, but sometimes they may be delivering critical information that ends up being
crucial to our survival as a species.
And God only knows that we need all the help we can get when it comes to saving our species. On that final note, I provide links to a few related blogs: