HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

Electronic Letters to:

COMMENTARY: Kathleen M. Rest and Michael H. Halpern Politics and the Erosion of Federal Scientific Capacity: Restoring Scientific Integrity to Public Health Science Am J Public Health 2007; 97: 1939-1944 [Abstract] [Full text] [PDF]

eLetters: Submit a response to this article

Electronic letters published:

Scientific Integrity in Public Health Science

Christian T. K.-H. Stadtländer   (30 November 2007)

Scientific Integrity in Public Health Science 30 November 2007
Christian T. K.-H. Stadtländer, Microbiologist and Epidemiologist University of St. Thomas, Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN 55403 Send letter to journal: Re: Scientific Integrity in Public Health Science stad0077{at}stthomas.edu Christian T. K.-H. Stadtländer	Rest and Halpern discussed an important topic, which is the political interference in federal government science (1). The authors mentioned four types of political interference, described their implications on public health science, and encouraged scientists, public health and medical professionals, as well as institutions and scientific societies to help restoring scientific integrity (1). I fully agree with the authors that independent scientific discovery, scientific openness, and uncensored communication of scientific data are essential for a nation’s health and prosperity. I also applaud their “call to action.” However, I believe that strategies aimed at restoring scientific integrity should include the education of young scientists because today’s students will become the leaders of our future organizations. Training courses in integrity and ethics allow students to learn the principles of ethical behavior, come in contact with their own values and ideals, and test them against others (2,3). In other words, we need to stimulate the next generation of public health leaders in their development toward moral leadership. This type of leadership is aimed at reaching higher purposes, controlling self-interest, and combating political influence. Moral leadership, in my opinion, is what is needed for restoring our organizations to their original purposes, typically outlined in mission statements. Kouzes and Posner believe that serving the values of freedom, justice, equality, caring, and dignity is important for constantly renewing the foundations of democracy (4). It is important to note that both organizations as an entity and employees as individuals have ethical responsibilities (5). Thus, organizations can and should have a conscience (6). Communication that conforms to fact (i.e., authentic communication) is crucial for developing values-based organizations (5). The development of moral leadership can be seen as part of an organizational learning process that should take place at all levels in the organization (among individuals, groups, and system-wide) and that links all members to create a functional, honest organization (5,7). The term integrity is often misunderstood. It may mean for some people secretiveness or blind loyalty and for others consistency (even in a bad cause), discretion, or bluntness (8). Teal defines integrity as being responsible, communicating clearly, being an honest broker, keeping promises, knowing oneself, and avoiding hidden agendas (8). I strongly believe that if we are able to instill positive values in scientists and administrators of the next generation and demonstrate how moral leadership looks like in practice, organizations of the future (including government agencies) will be able to attract and retain top- notch scientists. References 1. Rest KM, Halpern MH. Politics and the erosion of federal scientific capacity: restoring scientific integrity to public health science. Am J Public Health. 2007;97:1939-1944. 2. Pojman LP. Ethics: Discovering Right and Wrong. Belmont, Calif: Thomson Higher Education;2006. 3. Macrina FL. Scientific Integrity: Text and Cases in Responsible Conduct of Research. Washington, DC: American Society for Microbiology Press;2005. 4. Kouzes JM, Posner BZ. The Leadership Challenge. San Francisco, Calif: Jossey-Bass;2002. 5. Stadtländer CTK-H. Strategically balanced change: a key factor in modern management. Electronic J Bus Ethics Organization Studies. 2006;11:17-25. 6. Goodpaster KE, Matthews JB, Jr. Can a Corporation Have a Conscience? In: Andrews KR, vol. ed. Ethics in Practice: Managing the Moral Corporation. Boston, Mass: Harvard Business School Press;1989;155- 167. 7. Bennis W, Nanus B. Leaders: Strategies for Taking Charge. New York, NY: HarperCollins Publishers;1997. 8. Teal T. The Human Side of Management. In: Harvard Business Review on Leadership. Boston, Mass: Harvard Business School Press;1998;147-169.