webodec3ARCHIVEPreview
Open in TheBrain

Am Cncil on Sci and Health ACSH

NOTE 2 nodes, see ACSH

 WHELAN

The American Council on Science and Health (ACSH) describes itself as "a consumer education consortium concerned with issues related to food, nutrition, chemicals, pharmaceuticals, lifestyle, the environment and health." At one time the web site stated, "ACSH is an independent, nonprofit, tax-exempt organization. The nucleus of ACSH is a board of 350 physicians, scientists and policy advisors - experts in a wide variety of fields - who review the Council's reports and participate in ACSH seminars, press conferences, media communications and other educational activities." Currently that statement is changed to read, "ACSH is a national, non-profit, tax-exempt 501(c)(3) consumer health education and advocacy organization based in New York City." Note that the word "independent" no longer appears in the description.[1]

To its credit, it has taken a strong public position against the dangers of tobacco, one of the leading preventable causes of death in today's society. However, it takes a generally apologetic stance regarding virtually every other health and environmental hazard produced by modern industry, accepting corporate funding from Coca-Cola, Kellogg, General Mills, Pepsico, and the American Beverage Association, among others.

Contents[hide]

History

The website states that "ACSH was founded...by a group of scientists who had become concerned that many important public policies related to health and the environment did not have a sound scientific basis. These scientists created the organization to add reason and balance to debates about public health issues and bring common sense views to the public." [1]

ACSH director Elizabeth Whelan explains that the concept of ACSH emerged following being commissioned by Pfizer to produce a background paper on the 'Delaney Clause' in the 1958 Food Additive Amendment, which restricted the use of cancercausing chemicals in foods. Subsequently Whelan wrote Panic in the Pantry, a "book on the history of food scares", which was published in 1976.

ACSH was founded by Whelan and Dr. Frederick Stare in March 1978, with the assistance of her father and husband as legal advisers."With assistance from former Secretary of the Treasury William Simon, ACSH was introduced to the Scaife Foundations and John M. Olin Foundation which provided ACSH with its first financial support," Whelan explained in a retrospective on the organization's 25th anniversary. [2]

Independence

A revealing reference regarding ACSH's origins appears in the March 1978 minutes of a meeting of the board of directors of the Manufacturing Chemists' Association (later renamed the Chemical Manufacturers Association, and known today as the American Chemistry Council). The minutes record an appeal by MCA director William J. Driver, who noted that Whelan had founded "a tax-exempt organization composed of scientists whose viewpoints are more similar to those of business than dissimilar. . . . ACSH is being pinched for funds, but in the interest of independence and credibility will not accept support from any chemical company or any company which could even remotely be concerned with the aims of the council." [3]

Notwithstanding this desire to make ACSH appear independent, Driver added that "Dr. Whelan would be happy to hear from" MCA members who "are interested in the work of the council and know of possible sources of funds."

Media coverage

WaPo 2010: McCaughey and death panels

The Washington Post identified ACSH as "an industry-friendly group whose board member Betsy McCaughey helped set off the "death panels" frenzy" in the 2009 health care reform debate.[2]

Coverage of ACSH Ties

The conflict between ACSH's hidden sponsors and the views espoused occasionally rates a mention in media coverage too. Writing in the Columbia Journalism Review, Gloria Cooper wryly commented that the Today Show deserved a "dart" for "failing to meet truth-in-labeling standards." Cooper noted that in a June 12 2003 segment on the Today Show, Whelan had dismissed the suggestion of the New York Assemblyman Felix Ortiz that a 1 percent tax be placed on junk foods. "There is room in life for potato chips and Twinkies and all these other maligned foods if you don't eat huge amounts of them," Whelan said.

"Point well taken", Cooper wrote, "But one that viewers might well have taken with a mindful grain of salt, had they been given at least a clue to the organization that Whelan represents." [4]

Case studies

Alar and apples

"It was the great Alar scare of 1989 that boosted Whelan into the media stratosphere," Washington Post media reporter Howard Kurtz wrote in a 1990 article in the Columbia Journalism Review. ACSH and Whelan were fixtures on the anti-environmental scene long before the Alar issue emerged, downplaying risks from DDT, dioxin, asbestos, and a host of other polluting chemicals, but Whelan's prominent role in the Alar counter-publicity campaign helped make ACSH a common source for journalists seeking commentary on public health issues.

See Alar and apples

Benzene in Soft Drinks

See Benzene in Soft Drinks

C. Everett Koop and ACSH

See C. Everett Koop and ACSH

Panic Attack

See Panic Attack: ACSH Fears Nothing but Fear Itself

ACSH and Tobacco

In December, 1980 ACSH co-founder Stare wrote to tobacco giant Philip Morris seeking financial support. "We are a voice of scientific reason in a sea of pseudo science, exaggeration and misnformation. We believe it would be to your benefit to help ACSH," he wrote. Stare explained that the "basic" ACSH corporate benefactor membership was $3,000 "but we hope you will contribute $10,000 or more."[3]

Whelan&ACSH oppostion to tobacco

Despite Stare's 1980 solicitation of funds from PM, Whelan was an early advocate against the tobacco industry. In December 1981 she wrote to Henry Waxman explaining that while they opposed government labelling restrictions on food additives such as saccharin and nitrites - "because there is no adequate data to support the hypothesis that these substances pose a risk to human health" - cigarettes was another matter altogether.

"In the case of cigarette smoking, however, the evidence is overwhelming. I believe it is the correct role of government to provide educational information on the health risks to consumers, and let the consumers make their own decisions," she wrote.[5]

When a new cigarette brand called "Satin" appeared with the slogan "Spoil yourself with Satin," the ACHS commended this in a newsletter as the first truthful cigarette ad because "our dictionary defines 'spoil' as 'to damage seriously; to ruin; to impair the quality or effect of.' What better way to describe a product which harms the lungs, heart and other organs, stains the teeth and fingers, promotes wrinkles, fouls the breath, and leaves an unpleasant odor on hair and clothing. Certainly the more than 300,000 Americans who died last year of smoking related diseases were 'spoiled' by cigarettes."(L. White, Merchants of Death, 1988)

In 1982 and 1986, ACSH conducted a survey of magazines to determine how well they covered the hazards of smoking and to explore the role that cigarette advertising might play in editorial policy. The studies clearly showed that the best coverage of smoking and health was presented in magazines that did not accept cigarette advertising.(L. White, Merchants of Death, 1988).

Tobacco industry reaction

The tobacco industry, tired of Whelan's criticism of their products, considered exploiting concern over her advocacy for the interests of funders. In 1983 the lobby shop Shook, Hardy and Bacon drafted a briefing note just in case Tobacco Institute representatives were quizzed on why they hadn't responded to letters from Whelan. "It is interesting that Dr. Whelan continues to make unequivocal assertions about cigarette smoking at the same time that she categorically rejects similar charges about other possible health hazards, such as chemicals and food additives," they wrote. [6]

"It suggests that Dr. Whelan may be using different scientific standards to judge claims about cigarettes smoking than about products manufactured by companies that would appear to have a vested interest in furthering views such as those expressed by Dr. Whelan. As you may be aware, it has been suggested in the press and elsewhere that her views about certain products are open to question because of the sources of funding for her organization," the briefing note stated.

Sound Science Award

ACSH awarded author Michael Crichton its 2005 Sound Science Prize for "his defense of sound scientific principles and critiques of junk science" in his novel State of Fear.[4], although ACSH reportedly takes no stand on climate change. The ACSH has not awarded this prize before or since.[5]

Funding

Original

"ACSH did not accept funding -- even general operating funding -- from any corporation or trade association for the first two years of operation," Whelan explained in 2003. ACSH's policy, she said, was to only accept funding only from foundations was soon relaxed. "For two years we tried that, but the media still regularly implied that ACSH had industry support … The ACSH Board of Directors concluded that what critics objected to was not ACSH's funding but ACSH's views -- and that in avoiding corporate donations we were limiting ACSH's fundraising potential to no avail," she wrote insisting that corporate funding must be "no strings attached".

Shortly after its founding, ACSH abandoned even the appearance of independent funding. In a 1997 interview, Whelan explained that she was already being called a "paid liar for industry," so she figured she might as well go ahead and take industry money without restrictions.

2003 shortfall

In its IRS Form 990 for its fiscal year ending June 30, 2003, ACSH reported revenues totalling $1,332,214 but ran a deficit that year just over $402,000. (In comparison, its total revenue for the year to June 30 1999 was $2,566,557). See ACSH financial data

Faced with a budget shortfall, ACSH suspended the production of its newsletter, ACSH News, for eighteen months. [7] While ACSH's income has nosedived, salaries for the top three staff have climbed. In 2002-2003, the three highest paid staff - Whelan, Stier and Ross - accounted for $638,186 between them.

In a year that the organisation ran a substantial deficit, the salaries of the top three accounted for 48% of the revenue for the year and over a third of the organisations total expenditure. While Stier and Ross took a pay cut of approximately 4.5% each in 2002-2003, Whelan's salary rose by over 11%.

Proportions

In a speech marking the 25th anniversary of ACSH Whelan explained that about 40% of ACSH funding comes from private foundations, "about 40% from corporations, and the rest of the sale of ACSH publications", she wrote. "The important thing, though, is not the source of your funding but the accuracy of the points you make, and ACSH's scientific advisors and use of peer review keep us honest". [[8]

Funders

During its first 15 years of operation, ACSH published the names of its institutional funders, but it has stopped doing this in recent years, making it harder to identify where all of its money comes from. In the latest years for which information is available, some 40 percent of ACSH's budget was supplied directly by industry, including a long list of food, drug and chemical companies that have a vested interest in supporting Whelan's message.

1984 Funders

In its 1984 Annual report ACSH provided an extensive list of its corporate and foundations. [9] ACSH funders have included the following:

Funders who withdrew

According to ACSH, some of its funding from the food industry dried up after those companies were acquired by Philip Morris, which does not like the position that ACSH has taken against tobacco. "ACSH's warnings about cigarette smoking resulted in the loss of substantial contributions from food manufacturers that had been acquired by tobacco companies. A metal pipe manufacturer withdrew its support after ACSH defended the safety of the proper use of plastic pipes," ACSH states on its website. [10]

Supporters

While ACSH has never been far from controversy, it can draw on well-connected supporters. ABC News' John Stossel was the master of ceremonies at ACSH's 25th anniversary dinner on December 4, 2000.[11] (Stossel penned a commentary column - "The Anti-Junk Scientists" - lauding ACSH for that that days edition of the for the New York Post.) [12] Also attending was conservative humourist Christopher Buckley.

Personnel

ACSH has been headed by Elizabeth Whelan since its inception. Whelan makes no bones about her political leanings, describing herself as a lifelong conservative who is "more libertarian than Republican." According to media commentator Howard Kurtz, "Television producers like Whelan because she's colorful and succinct, skewering her adversaries with such phrases as 'toxic terrorists' and referring to their research as 'voodoo statistics.' Newspaper reporters often dial her number because she is an easily accessible spokesperson for the 'other' side of many controversies."

Board of Trustees

December 2009

The ACSH board of Trustees, as of December 2009[6], is composed of:

July 2004

The ACSH board of Trustees, as of July 2004, was composed of:

Founders Circle

In December 2009 the ACSH listed the following individuals in its Founders Circle[6]:

Scientific Advisors

As of December 2009, ACSH lists over 300 advisors; see ACSH Scientific advisors

Staff

Staff, including the salaries and benefits to its top five employees were reported in ACSH's 2003 IRS return as follows:

(Between the 1999 financial year to 2003, Whelan's salary climbed from $223,570 to $326,612; Stiers from $110,185 to $155,577 and Gilbert Ross's from $87,325 to 155,997). (See ACSH staff salaries).

Former staff

Nicolas Martin was ACSH's administrative director during parts of 1988 and 1989. He dubbed ACSH's President, Elizabeth Whelan, the "junk food queen" for her defense of companies who make products with low nutritional value.

Martin says that during his tenure with ACSH he saw or was informed of instances when funders were intimately involved in ACSH projects. Before Martin's arrival at the organization, ACSH published a booklet on sugar and health. He says that he was told by ACSH's then vice-president, Edward Remmers, that the booklet was printed in-house by The Hershey Company. Martin says that during his tenure ACSH was producing a booklet on alcohol and health that the Stroh Brewery Company participated in editing. Neither booklet included an acknowledgement of funder participation.

Martin claims that in 1999 The Professional Lawn Care Association of America (PLCAA) asked ACSH to publish a booklet defending chemicals used for lawn care. He says that Dr. Whelan insisted that ACSH would only produce such a defense if the PLCAA made a donation to fund it. This is the sort of quid pro quo Dr. Whelan has always claimed that ACSH has never permitted.[13] Martin says that he notified ACSH board members of these apparent violations of ACSH policy, but that no public acknowledgement or correction resulted.

Martin disputes Dr. Whelan's claim to be a libertarian, noting that she has long supported government limits on the sale of food supplements, and controls over tobacco sale and use by adults. He notes that Dr. Whelan attended a fundraiser to support the Supreme Court nomination of Robert Bork, whose constitutional views are anathema to most libertarians.

From 1989 to the present, Martin has been executive director of the Consumer Health Education Council.

Contact Information

American Council on Science and Health

1995 Broadway

New York, NY 10023-5860

phone: (212) 362-7044

http://www.acsh.org

Related SourceWatch Resources

External links

Referenced version available at web address above. This article discusses the threats to science and society posed by anti-science groups, focusing on American Council on Science and Health, and provides background on Elizabeth Whelan and Gilbert Ross. An open access powerpoint is available at Confronting pseudoscience and threats from a corporate front group - the American Council on Science and Health. No password necessary.

Articles by ACSH Staff

ACSH Annual Reports

General Articles

References

  1. ↑ American Council on Science and Health About, organizational web page, accessed January 24, 2012
  2. ↑ Dan Eggen How interest groups behind health-care legislation are financed is often unclear Washington Post, January 7, 2010, Page A1
  3. ↑ Stare, FJ 3-page Letter, Bates No.1000283163/3165, Philip Morris document collection, December 5, 1980
  4. ↑ Author unknown (2005-11-08). Michael Crichton Accepts Award from ACSH. ACSH. Retrieved on 2010-11-17. “New York, NY -- November 8, 2005. The American Council on Science and Health (ACSH) presented Dr. Michael Crichton with the 2005 Sound Science Award for his defense of sound scientific principles and critiques of junk science...at the Union League Club in Manhattan on Friday, November 4th...drew an impressive crowd and featured remarks from such prominent individuals as ABC News's John Stossel and former White House Chief Counsel, the Honorable C. Boyden Gray, in addition to the guest of honor.”
  5. ↑ Whelan, Nov. 2010, pers. comm.
  6. ↑ 6.0 6.1 ACSH Trustees and Founders Circle. American Council on Science and Health. Retrieved on 2009-12-24.

This article may include information from Tobacco Documents Online.

Search the Documents Archives of the Tobacco IndustrySearch the Documents Archives of the Tobacco IndustrySearch the Documents Archives of the Tobacco IndustrySearch the Documents Archives of the Tobacco Industry
Legacy Tobacco Documents Library:

Categories: Tobaccowiki | Front groups portal | Tobacco documents organizations | Advertisement | Cigarettes | Diseases | Health | United States | Environment | Front groups

 Born in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (20 October 1948), Elizabeth Betsy McCaughey is a policy analyst best known for writing what has been widely described as a "false"[1] and "error-laden"[2] negative critique of Hillary Clinton's healthcare reform proposals in a 1994 New Republic article titled "No Exit." More recently McCaughey has reappeared as the main source of the "Death Panel" rumor in the US made famous by Sarah Palin[3]. She has also written favorable articles about Tea Party candidates[4] as well as been featured as a speaker at Tea Party rallies and events.[5]

Contents [hide]

Education and Career

In 1976 McCaughey received her PhD in constitutional history from Columbia University. She has trained in corporate banking and served as a "lending officer in the Food, Beverage, and Tobacco Division."[6] She is the author of several books and her writings have appeared in scholarly journals and news publications. She has been featured on various US news shows throughout the years. McCaughey has lectured at Vassar College and Columbia University and worked at right-wing think tanks including the Manhattan Institute where she authored her infamous New Republic article "No Exit," and the Hudson Institute where she remains today. Shortly after publishing "No Exit", McCaughey became Lt. Governor of New York State from 1994-1998 where she reportedly did not have a "working relationship"[7] with Governor George Pataki. Pataki "ignored"[7] McCaughey's policy recommendations and in response McCaughey accused him of "McCarthyism."[7] In 2004 she founded the "Committee to Reduce Infection Deaths," which she describes as "a nationwide educational campaign to stop hospital-acquired infections."[6] In 2009 one of McCaughey's staff members "abruptly resigned" from the committee "expressing concern that Ms. McCaughey was using it as a platform for some of the harshest — and sometimes false — attacks against President Obama’s health care plan."[8]

History

McCaughey has shifted between the Democrat and Republican party, worked for universities and think tanks, and served in government all while writing for news publications and appearing on news shows to discuss her views on US healthcare debates. Referred to as an "East Coast version of Sarah Palin"[7] in a profile done of her in the New Republic (the magazine that published her infamous "No Exit" article), McCaughey shot to fame and infamy after "No Exit" was shown to be ridden with errors and inaccurate claims. Despite the negative press "No Exit" conjured, McCaughey has had a successful career as a policy analyst and currently runs a campaign against the Obama Administration's proposed healthcare reforms by writing articles and through her website, DefendYourHealthcare. Although she has repeatedly been discredited for reportedly incorporating "fearmongering" into her analyses, McCaughey continues to be quoted as an expert and is frequently invited to speak at US policy and political events.

"No Exit"

In 1994 under the supervision of then New Republic editor Andrew Sullivan (Sullivan wrote in 2009 that he did not "commission the piece"),[9] McCaughey wrote an article providing an extremely negative take on the Clintons' proposed health care reforms titled "No Exit".[10] Many argue that the piece "helped derail health care reform"[11] and influence political debate in Washington. McCaughey's attempt to display neutrality on the issue of health care in the US was seriously undermined by her history of working for right-wing think thanks (at the time of "No Exit's" publication McCaughey was working at the Manhattan Institute,[12] a position she reportedly got by way of a friend on the board) Even though many journalists such as The Atlantic's James Fallows[13][14] decried the article's accuracy then and even more so now,[15] TNR was awarded the National Magazine Award for McCaughey's work in 1995.[16]

McCaughey and Big Tobacco

In 2009 a report by Rolling Stone's Tim Dickinson provided evidence that McCaughey was "influenced" by Tobacco giant Philip Morris while writing "No Exit."

In an internal company memo from March 1994, the tobacco giant detailed its strategy to derail Hillarycare through an alliance with conservative think tanks, front groups and media outlets. Integral to the company's strategy, the memo observed, was an effort to "work on the development of favorable pieces" with "friendly contacts in the media." The memo, prepared by a Philip Morris executive, mentions only one author by name:"Worked off-the-record with Manhattan and writer Betsy McCaughey as part of the input to the three-part exposé in The New Republic on what the Clinton plan means to you. The first part detailed specifics of the plan."[17]

Jamison Foser of Media Matters for America expanded on the report, revealing that McCaughey's employer at the time, the Manhattan Institute was being funded by Philip Morris:

See, McCaughey was working for The Manhattan Institute at the time. And The Manhattan Institute was funded by -- you guessed it -- tobacco companies.While Phillip Morris was "working with" McCaughey in 1994, the tobacco giant was also budgeting $25,000 for The Manhattan Institute for 1995. The Manhattan Institute has also taken tobacco money from Brown & Williamson, R.J. Reynolds, and Lorillard.[18]

In response to Dickinson's report Lawrence Mone of the Manhattan Institute wrote a letter to Rolling Stone's editor which James Fallows of The Atlantic reprinted parts of, denying claims that McCaughey's work at the institute was influenced by tobacco:

"Below is a letter to the editor of Rolling Stone from Lawrence Mone, president, Manhattan Institute for Policy Research."In his article "The Lie Machine," Tim Dickenson asserts that former Manhattan Institute scholar Betsy McCaughey's work was influenced by Phillip Morris. This conclusion is false. Betsy McCaughey wrote two articles for the Wall Street Journal on the Clinton Health Care plan and an additional article for the New Republic which was solicited by its publisher. At no time were her ideas influenced or controlled by anyone but the author herself."[19]

Fallows, who has been McCaughey's strongest critic since "No Exit," followed up with the Manhattan Institute asking for clarification since Dickinson's report alleged that McCaughey worked secretly with tobacco companies and the Manhattan Institute's response seemed to only address an official claim that she worked with them. The Manhattan Institute repeated their claims to Fallows, which ultimately left him unable to make a clear conclusion:

Is this a question of a lobbyist grossly exaggerating his "influence" to impress bosses and funders? That's a very familiar pattern in Washington. On the other hand, the lobbyist's detailed knowledge of Betsy McCaughey's writing plans suggests some interaction. I don't know the underlying truth here. It would be valuable if Ms. McCaughey, who has specialized in detailed textual analysis, would address in specific what these documents contend.[19]

Death Panels

In 2009 a "false"[3] rumor was circulated in the US stating that the Obama administrations's proposed health care reforms would involve government-sponsored "death panels" allotted with the authority to decide which patients would be allowed to live. Its most effective proponent became former presidential candidate John McCain's running mate, Sarah Palin.[20] What surprised some analysts was the speed and momentum with which the rumor spread, eventually making its way into serious health debates, despite the fact that it was proven wrong time and again.[3] Weeks later it became clear that the main source of the rumor was McCaughey.[21][22]

in a radio interview with former Senator Fred Thompson, Ms. McCaughey said, “One of the most shocking things I found in this bill, and there were many, is on Page 425, where the Congress would make it mandatory, absolutely require, that every five years, people in Medicare have a required counseling session that will tell them how to end their life sooner.” She went on to say that it encouraged people to cut their lives short “in society’s best interest.”[20]

While it was proven from the onset of the rumor that "the bill offers to pay for Medicare patients to speak with their doctors about their wishes for the end of their life, on issues like who will be allowed to make decisions if they are incapacitated, and what kinds of care are available for terminally ill people," the rumor had a serious effect on the Obama administration's health proposals and "hijacked"[23] the healthcare debate.

But in today’s vicious news cycle, lies take on lives of their own on Web sites, blogs and e-mail chains and go viral in seconds. Ms. McCaughey’s claims were soon widely circulated in the thirst for ammunition against the Democrats’ health care reform plan.[23]

Oregon Democratic Representative Earl Blumenauer also traced the source of the rumor from McCaughey all the way to its proponents in congress and held the media responsible for not pointing out its falsehoods earlier:

The news media was a particular culprit in this drama. This was not just Fox News; seemingly all the national news organizations monitored any meetings they could find between lawmakers and constituents, looking for flare-ups, for YouTube moments. The meetings that involved thoughtful exchanges or even support for the proposals would never find their way on air; coverage was given only to the most outrageous behavior, furthering distorting the true picture... By lavishing uncritical attention on the most exaggerated claims and extreme behavior, they unleashed something that the truth could not dispel.[23]

Comments on the "Public Option"

Criticism

While McCaughey has written and spoken extensively about the "unfair" treatment she received following the emergence of widespread condemnations of "No Exit" for its lack of factual accuracy, she continues to be featured as healthcare policy expert. According to Media Matters for America Senior Fellow Jamison Foser:

Inexplicably, McCaughey is trotted out on television shows and in newspapers to provide "expert" analysis of current health care reform proposals. Incredibly, McCaughey is cast in precisely the role she performed so fraudulently last time around: as the just-the-facts Ph.D. who has, unlike the advocates of reform, actually read every page of the bill. Once again, she brings with her -- and dramatically waves around -- an almost unbelievably thick three-ring binder, which she incredulously announces is only half of the bill. She peppers her alarmist (and clearly false) claims about health care reform with footnotes and page numbers. Those page numbers happen to be the only things she says that actually appear in the bill. But never mind all that. She's an "expert."[15]

Affiliations

Contact

Twitter: http://twitter.com/#!/betsy_mccaughey

Website: http://www.defendyourhealthcare.us/

Resources

References

  1. ↑ Michelle Cottle, "No Exit The never-ending lunacy of Betsy McCaughey.", The New Republic, 5 October 2009
  2. ↑ Conor Clark, "The Rise and Fall (and Rise) of Betsy McCaughey", The Atlantic, 29 July 2009
  3. ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 JIM RUTENBERG and JACKIE CALMES, "False ‘Death Panel’ Rumor Has Some Familiar Roots", New York Time, 13 August 2009
  4. ↑ Betsy McCaughey, "The seniority trap", New York Post, 31 October 2010, accessed on 17 November 2010
  5. ↑ David Weigel, "Betsy McCaughey, Mike Pence, Stephen Baldwin to Speak at 9/12 ‘Tea Party’ March on Washington", Washington Independent, 3 September 2009
  6. ↑ 6.0 6.1 6.2 6.3 Betsey McCaughey CV
  7. ↑ 7.0 7.1 7.2 7.3 Noah Kristula-Green, "Slideshow: The Many Lives of Betsy McCaughey", New Republic, 5 October 2009
  8. ↑ Jim Rutenberg, "Resurfacing, a Critic Stirs Up Debate Over Health Care", New York Times, 4 September 2009
  9. ↑ Andrew Sullivan, "Betsy McCaughey And Big Tobacco", The Atlantic, 29 September 2009
  10. ↑ Elizabeth McCaughey, "No Exit", The New Republic, 7 February 1994
  11. ↑ Michael Calderone, "Foer on TNR's 'original sin'; McCaughey piece 15 years later", Politico, 5 October 2009
  12. ↑ James Fallows, "Let's Stop This Before It Goes Any Further", The Atlantic, 12 February 2009
  13. ↑ James Fallows, "A T, The Atlantic, January 1995
  14. ↑ James Fallows, "I was wrong", The Atlantic, 13 August 2009
  15. ↑ 15.0 15.1 Jamison Foser, "No apology", Media Matters for America, 9 October 2009
  16. ↑ Mickey Kaus, "No Exegesis", The New Republic, 8 May 1995
  17. ↑ Andrew Sullivan, "Betsy McCaughey And Big Tobacco", The Atlantic, 29 September 2009
  18. ↑ Jamison Foser, "Betsy McCaughey, Big Tobacco, and the campaign to destroy health care reform", Media Matters for America, 28 September 2009
  19. ↑ 19.0 19.1 James Fallows, "Manhattan Institute replies (re McCaughey and tobacco lobby) UPDATED", The Atlantic, 28 September 2009
  20. ↑ 20.0 20.1 Jim Dwyer, "Distortions on Health Bill, Homegrown", New York Times, 25 August 2009
  21. ↑ Jim Rutenberg, "Resurfacing, a Critic Stirs Up Debate Over Health Care", New York Times, 4 September 2009
  22. ↑ Betsy McCaughey, "DEADLY DOCTORS O ADVISERS WANT TO RATION CARE", New York Post, 24 July 2009, accessed on 21 November 2010
  23. ↑ 23.0 23.1 23.2 EARL BLUMENAUER, "My Near Death Panel Experience", New York Times, 14 November 2009
  24. ↑ Betsy McCaughey,"Betsey McCaughey on Dylan Ratigan Show (Part 1)", The Dylan Ratigan Show (YouTube), 6 October 2009
  25. ↑ Betsy McCaughey,"Betsey McCaughey on Dylan Ratigan Show (Part 2)", The Dylan Ratigan Show (YouTube), 6 October 2009

http://powerbase.info/index.php/Betsy_McCaughey

 ===

The Role of Beef in the

American Diet

Prepared for the American Council on Science and Health

by Kathleen Meister, M.S.

Project Coordinator

Ruth Kava, Ph.D., R.D.

Director of Nutrition

President

Elizabeth M. Whelan, Sc.D., M.P.H.

Art Director

Yelena Ponirovskaya

January 2003THE AMERICAN COUNCIL ON SCIENCE AND HEALTH (ACSH) APPRECIATES

THE CONTRIBUTIONS OF THE REVIEWERS NAMED BELOW.

ACSH accepts unrestricted grants on the condition that it is solely responsible for the conduct of

its research and the dissemination of its work to the public. The organization does not perform

proprietary research, nor does it accept support from individual corporations for specific research

projects. All contributions to ACSH—a publicly funded organization under Section 501(c)(3) of

the Internal Revenue Code—are tax deductible.

Individual copies of this report are available at a cost of $5.00. Reduced prices for 10 or more

copies are available upon request.

200three.

Alwynelle S. Ahl, Ph.D., D.V.M,

Tuskegee University

Francis F. Busta, Ph.D.

University of Minnesota

Zerle L. Carpenter, Ph.D.

Texas A&M University

F.J. Francis, Ph.D.

University of Massachusetts, Amherst

Richard A. Greenberg, Ph.D.

Hinsdale, IL

Virgil W. Hays, Ph.D.

University of Kentucky

Manfred Kroger, Ph.D.

The Pennsylvania State University

David Kritchevsky, Ph.D.

The Wistar Institute

William J. Miller, Ph.D.

University of Georgia

Joyce A. Nettleton, D.Sc., R.D.

Denver, CO

Stanley T. Omaye, Ph.D., F.ATS,

F.ACN, C.N.S.

University of Nevada, Reno

Gilbert L. Ross, M.D.

ACSH

Harold H. Sandstead, M.D.

University of Texas Medical Branch,

Galveston

Elizabeth M. Whelan, Sc.D., M.P.H

==