David Secko's repetition in the Tyee story "The Drug Trial on Trial" of the many falsehoods in Shuchman's book The Drug Trial is concerning. Secko omitted most of my written comments to him with respect to misleading and incorrect statements by Shuchman, although, unlike her statements, quoted uncritically by Secko, my comments are based on an extensively documented public record available to both Secko and Shuchman.

Secko's selection of comments from those who would defend anonymous quotes suggests bias. Secko's "authorities" maintain that work relying on anonymous sources should be respected. To sustain this position in the case of Shuchman's book, Secko's authorities would need to purport that her anonymous sources were fact-checked by the book's publisher, Random House (as claimed by Shuchman and repeated by Secko). That claim is cast into doubt by the fact that, already, at least two individuals whom Shuchman in fact identified - all of whom stated in public sources available to Secko that Shuchman misquoted them - were not fact-checked accurately.

Of course, by quoting any of these easily available sources Secko's doubtful "slant" on this book would have been called into question.

Cited and misrepresented by Shuchman was University of Toronto's Professor of Surgery and Molecular Genetics Dr. Brenda Gallie who, stated clearly in Maclean's in a letter published one week prior to Secko's article:

"The book by Shuchman is cheap tabloid fiction. I was head of the blood research program at Sick Kids Hospital when Dr. Nancy Olivieri stood up for the rights of children who volunteer for clinical trials. Shuchman's description of the ensuing firestorm might be comical if not so viciously harmful. For example, two other doctors and myself concluded definitively that the ordinary rules of authorship did not qualify Carcao for authorship of a project he had started with Olivieri, but failed to finish or pass to the next students. Shuchman misreports my role and reverses the conclusion to bring pity on the poor trainee. Could Shuchman be jealous of Olivieri's top clinical expertise, global leadership and courageous honesty?" [emphases added]

Also cited and misrepresented by Shuchman was Professor Arthur Schafer, director of the Center for Professional and Applied Ethics at the University of Manitoba, who clearly summarized his position in the CAUT Bulletin published on line two weeks before Secko's article:

"This heavily biased style of presentation undermines the book's credibility. Credibility is a big issue here, because most of the hostile quotations are attributed to doctors and patients who are not identified. One of the few clearly identified patients, "Howard", has now gone on record as saying that his words, as quoted in the book, were twisted beyond recognition. He insists that, so far from being critical of Olivieri's patient care or ethics, he considers her to be a highly ethical doctor who is utterly dedicated to her patients. My confidence in Shuchman's journalistic reliability was further eroded when I came across a passage in which she "quotes" from a commentary I published in The Globe and Mail. I wrote none of the words she attributes to me." [emphases added]

Regrettably, Secko and The Tyee have reinforced Shuchman's attacks on me, rather than report the truth available on the public record.

Sincerely,

Nancy Olivieri, MD, FRCP(C)

Professor, Pediatrics and Medicine,

University of Toronto, Canada