August 5, 2020 • 19 mins
Dr. Samuel Friedman is a Research Professor and faculty member at the Center for Opioid Epidemiology and Policy in the Department of Population Health at NYU Grossman School of Medicine. He is also the Senior Theoretician and Associate Director of the Infectious Disease Epidemiology and Theory Core at the Center for Drug Use and HIV Research (CDUHR). In this bonus episode, Sam and Valerie discuss their role in activism as it relates to academia. Sam also talks about his role in drug user activism in the 1990s, specifically a demonstration at the Department of Health and Human Services which involves a 12 foot tall replica of a human backbone.
Read more about Dr. Friedman's work here: https://med.nyu.edu/faculty/samuel-r-friedman
And here: https://www.nyu.edu/about/news-publications/news/2012/july/nyucn-center-for-drug-use-and-hiv-researchs-drsamuel-friedman-awarded-a-nida-2012-avant-garde-award.html
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Valerie (00:12):
I'm Valerie Earnshaw.
Carly (00:14):
I'm Carly Hill.
Valerie (00:15):
And this is Sex, Drugs and Science.
Today's conversation is with Dr.
Sam Friedman.
Sam is a research professor anda faculty member at the Center
for Opioid Epidemiology andPolicy i n the Department of
Population Health at New YorkUniversity's Grossman School of
Medicine, He is also theassociate director of the
Infectious Disease, Epidemiologyand Theory Corp at the Center
(00:38):
for Drug Abuse i n HIV Research.
Carly (00:41):
Today's bonus episode is a brief one.
Unfortunately, we had sometechnical difficulties during
our recording, but our fantasticeditor, Kristina Holsapple was
able to piece together a fewbits of the conversation.
So we hope you enjoy it.
Valerie (01:06):
Alright.
So in this first segment that wewere able, that Kristina was
able to salvage for us, we askedSam about his thoughts on being
a scientist and an activist.
So essentially, you know,whether there is a contradiction
there.
So first off I should say thatSam just doesn't identify as a
scientist.
(01:26):
So that was good to know.
He identifies as a scholar, somaybe I'll need to sort of dig
into some of these identityissues in season two.
Carly (01:35):
I think so.
Valerie (01:36):
Double check that the people we're interviewing
identify a s cientist, who theyare a little bit more deeply.
But more generally, I mean,this, this conversation around
science and activism is one thatI'm really interested in.
I'm really curious as to whetherscientists, especially in our
(01:58):
field identify as activists.
I think that there, some peopleperceive that there's a risk
that identifying as an activistm eans that y our objectivity is
sort of clouded.
And I h ad n ever really thoughtabout this until I was at
Harvard Med School.
(02:19):
So I was a faculty member thereand we were hosting a symposium.
It was on LGBT bullying, and itwas like so interesting.
So there was a panel discussion,which means that there were a
group of people sitting on thestage and they were talking to
each other about differentissues related to bullying.
And it was, it was a greatpanel.
(02:40):
There were, you know, about, Ithink it was l ike just about
half of the folks on the panel were researchers and the other
half w ere community members,including some youth from the
LGBT community in Boston.
And somebody raised their handand they asked t he panel if
they were activists, and likewho identified as an activist?
(03:02):
And I'll never forget it.
Like all of the youth r aisedtheir hand.
One of the scientists, you know,one of the P hDs on the panel
raised a hand and then two ofthem didn't.
And I was just, I was reallysurprised because these two
scientists in particular arepeople who do a lot of research
(03:25):
on structural stigma and who,who have done amazing work on
stigma.
A lot of it, which I think islike calling for social change.
And so I was just reallyinterested that they did not
identify as activists.
And then they took a poll ofthe, of the room, like of the
audience.
And it was still like, i t wasabout like 50/50.
Carly (03:46):
Which is that like, it doesn't line up, you know?
Unless it's one of those thingswhere like, you get so deep into
the research that it's just likea part of your everyday life.
And it doesn't seem, I feel likethe term activism comes with
some sort of like, charge aboutit, you know?
Like there's like a harddefinition of that.
That seems sort of radical, Ithink, in a lot of c ontexts and
like, you know, so maybe once you're, you're doing all that
(04:06):
stigma research t hat like yousaid is so, you know, calls for
activism, you know, most of thetime that you just, not that
you're numb to it, but itdoesn't feel so radical when
that's the work that you'redoing e very d ay.
But.
Valerie (04:19):
Yeah, no, I think that's a really good point.
And so that's why I kind of circled back.
I'm like maybe, maybe the ideais that if they identify as an
activist, a ctivist, then theyworry that their objectivity is
clouded, that they like, youknow, can't be a s trusted with
the d ata or something.
But I mean, I've always s howedup to protests.
(04:41):
I mean, on our Instagramaccount, we have some photos
from Stephanie Chaudoir was onthe podcast out protesting.
I went with her to the Women'sMarch.
And I went most recently to avery super socially distance
protest at our Acme.
I don't know if I told you aboutthat, which is our local grocery
store.
Carly (05:00):
Yes.
Valerie (05:01):
Black Lives Matter movement.
And so I just, I really don'tsee that as, as conflicting,
especially because we havetheory and we have research, I
think showing that like socialchange helps to stop stigma.
So if I'm helping to stop stigmathrough my intervention work
through like my other projects,like why not help to stop stigma
(05:24):
by like going to protests orengagement activism, like, you
know, so anyway, I just, I, Idid raise my hand, so yeah.
So anyway, so we asked Sam thisquestion and, and now you'll
hear him, uh, think through andtalk through what his thoughts
are.
(05:50):
So coming off, you know,thoughts of the revolution, one
of the things I wanted to askyou about, especially since you
were out protesting this week,was your thoughts on sort of the
intersection between being ascientist and being an activist,
and how you see those, those tworoles?
(06:12):
Are they complimentary?
Are they contradictory?
And as I previewed, maybe I'vealready answered this since you
were out protesting this week,but I'd love to hear your
thoughts on that.
Sam (06:22):
I mean, I mean, I see no contradiction.
I'm not sure I'm a scientist.
I tend to think of myself as ascholar.
But, when I wrote my first book,which was called"Teamster Rank
(06:52):
and File", and what a qualitative study of an activist
i n militant local union in LosAngeles of truck drivers.
I made the point that there w asa lot of stuff I couldn't have
understood or learned if I werenot part of a movement that had
(07:20):
worked with those truck driverswhen they were on W ildcat
strike.
And that furthermore, as I thinkeveryone understands the concept
of scientific objectivity isbullshit.
But you can have i s scientificintegrity and honesty and
(07:45):
attempt to understand yourbiases, but that doesn't mean
get rid of them necessarily.
You k now, it means understandwhat you were doing and that
sometimes it's committed tothings.
(08:05):
One of the things I found when Ifirst came to A IDS work was
that all this stuff aboutobjectivity and this, that, and
the other on a certain level wasutter nonsense because all of
these researchers are ganging upon some poor virus.
Valerie (08:29):
Okay.
Sam (08:30):
And all of medicine is committed to killing germs.
That's not objective, that'staking sides.
Valerie (08:40):
I've never thought of it that way.
Carly (08:42):
No, me neither.
That was like one of those likemindblowing...
Valerie (08:46):
Yeah.
Carly (08:46):
Moments for me where I was like, huh, well, well damn.
Valerie (08:50):
Well, I do feel like Sam is the one to question
everything.
Carly (09:04):
A ll r ight.
So then Sam shared with us hisinvolvement in drug user
activism in the 1990s and theearly 2000s, including a
demonstration at the Departmentof Health and Human Services.
Valerie (09:18):
So could you tell us a little bit more maybe about what
act, what activism, or I knowyou've written about, like
social organizations or grouporganizations for drug users,
sort of like sort of what thoseorganizations and movements look
like?
Sam (09:32):
It's hard to generalize.
And there's been some historicalchange.
To begin with, almost all ofthem were student councils for
drug treatment programs.
Valerie (09:50):
Oh! So affiliated with universities?
Sam (09:52):
No.
Affiliated with drug treatmentprograms.
Valerie (09:55):
Oh, okay.
Sam (09:57):
But you know, like a high school student council, which is
a creature of the administrationusually.
Valerie (10:04):
Oh, okay.
Interesting.
Sam (10:05):
However, there were a few real exceptions, and I've
written extensively about thejunky in the Netherlands.
And they were a clear exception,although not all of them, some
of them were at least halfway inbetween.
(10:26):
Let's put it that way.
They were creatures of the drugtreatment program, but that's at
least in part because the peoplein the drug treatment program
were halfway to being part of ajunky move.
It's, but for example, the, andthen there were groups like the
(10:53):
Amsterdam group, which I forgetwhat it, the name was, which was
actually in many ways anorganization of the drug reform
movement rather than of the druguser activist movement, but
cooperative.
So that I was kind of another inbetween thing.
(11:17):
Now over time, huge varieties ofdifferent things.
For example, in Australia,basically they funded drug user
activism from the stategovernment.
Valerie (11:34):
Oh, really?
Sam (11:34):
They wanted to have a voice on AIDS coming from drug users
because it seemed to be workingfor gays.
Valerie (11:42):
Interesting.
Okay.
Sam (11:43):
Now that is an interesting form of organization.
Quite effective in many a ndcertainly effective yelling at
government officials at varioustimes and did a lot of good
outreach and similar work i nsome organizing.
(12:03):
Now we have international bodiesthat have been lasting in
reasonable shape since about2008.
I mean, we'd had predecessorinternational bodies.
And there's some continuity ofthem all the way into the early
(12:28):
nineties.
But none of them almost haveever become mass activists.
There aren't that many drugusers.
Valerie (12:42):
Yeah.
That's interesting.
I mean, we've got all of thisattention on the opioid epidemic
in the US.
At least, you know, pre-COVIDthat was a big part of the
discussion.
And it's interesting because Ihave colleagues who, you know,
will look at their data andthere'll be like,"I don't know
what's wrong with the data thatI collected.
(13:03):
There's not a lot of drug usersin here, but that there's all
this noise about the opioidepidemic.
So where are all the peopleusing opioids in my dataset?"
Sam (13:12):
Well, that's obvious.
They're not telling them.
Valerie (13:15):
That is, yep.
That is true.
Sam (13:17):
It's very hard in a general population survey to get people
to admit drug use.
Valerie (13:27):
S ure.
Sam (13:27):
You know, we've made estimates.
Other people have madeestimates.
Depending how you define it, orsomething like two or 3 million
drug users, opioid users in theUS, probably less than 1%.
Valerie (13:46):
Right.
Sam (13:48):
They're spread all over.
There have been demonstrationswith hundreds of people, but,
you know, at least officiallythey're harm reduction
demonstrations.
It's safer that way.
And often it is harmreductionists.
(14:10):
Many of whom are always ex-drugusers.
Some of whom may not be so e x.
Valerie (14:18):
O kay.
Sam (14:19):
But, you know, I remember a demonstration in the mid 90s, I
think it was at HHS inWashington, several hundred
people screaming about needleexchange.
(14:42):
Of the people who actually hadRO1s at the time.
Valerie (14:49):
So the big research grants that we from the National
Institutes of Health.
Sam (14:53):
Yeah.
That is the people who might beidentifiable to people walking
by.
Valerie (15:01):
O kay.
Sam (15:03):
I mean, there are a few others who might be identifiable
as project directors or thingslike that, or even postdocs,
there were only two of us.
And I've always been very, veryimpressed by David Metsker that
(15:24):
he came.
He also has roots in the drugtreatment world after all.
Valerie (15:31):
Okay.
Sam (15:34):
But yeah, the two of us did it, and there was no retribution
that I know of.
Valerie (15:41):
Okay.
Well, given your careertrajectory and your Avid Guard
award and everything, I wouldsay that you did pretty well
despite, you know, despite theprotest.
So we did some research intothis protest at the Department
(16:08):
of Health and Human Services, orHHS.
So we think that it was in 1997.
And we found out basically thatthere were about 500 to a
thousand people by newspaperreports gathered to protest HHS
secretary, Donna Shalala, andpresident Clinton's inaction on
(16:29):
lifting the ban on federalfunding of needle exchange
programs.
So, you know, by 1997, there'sgood scientific evidence that
these needle exchange programscan effectively like reduce the
spread of HIV and is a reallygood HIV, HIV prevention
strategy for people who injectdrugs.
(16:49):
So we have the data.
And then the problem is thatthere's no federal funding for
this thing that is super, supereffective.
So it looks like the protest wasorganized by the National
Coalition to Save Lives Now.
And my favorite part about thisprotest was that there were 12
(17:11):
protestors who were arrested forattempting to bring a 12 foot
tall replica of a human backboneinto the HHS building.
And they had signs that saidmoral backbone for Clinton and
moral backbone for Shalala.
So this is just my favoritething.
Carly (17:27):
That is such a boss move, you know?
Valerie (17:29):
Yeah, absolutely.
So it really made me feel like,you know, for the next protest
that I go out to, I need to likestep up my game.
Carly (17:38):
Yeah.
You got to get better, morepowerful props, you know.
Valerie (17:41):
I know.
Y eah.
A t the last one I had, youknow, like my sign and then I
wore my Ruth Bader Ginsburgmask, which I felt like was
pretty, pretty g ood.
Carly (17:50):
Yeah.
Those a re, that's pretty b oldtoo.
I mean, it's no backbone, but...
Valerie (17:53):
I t's no backbone.
Like I need to go more vertical.
I n eed to like break out somepaper mache.
Carly (17:59):
Yes, exactly.
Valerie (18:01):
Okay.
Well, so we, we definitelyappreciate some inspiring
stories to keep us going in ourown activism.
Carly (18:09):
Absolutely.
Valerie (18:10):
And moving forward, Thank you to the Stigma and
Health and Inequities Lab at theUniversity of Delaware,
including McKenzie Sarnak, SarayLopez and Alissa Leung.
This episode was edited byKristina Holsapple.
Carly (18:28):
Thanks always to City Girl for letting us use the
music.
And you guys can follow us onInstagram at Sex, Drugs,
Science, no and for updates, oryou guys can email us any
comments, questions, concerns,et cetera, at
sexdrugsnscience@gmail.com.
So that's Sex Drugs, the letterN science at gmail.com.
Valerie (18:50):
Apparently Sex, drugs, and Science w as already taken.
Carly (18:53):
Yeah.
Valerie (18:54):
We'll have to send them an email a nd I'll figure out
who they are.
Carly (18:57):
We can buy the rights.
Valerie (19:00):
Yeah.
All right.
Well, thank you all forlistening.
Speaker 2 (19:23):
[inaudible].
I'm Valerie Earnshaw.
Carly (00:14):
I'm Carly Hill.
Valerie (00:15):
And this is Sex, Drugs and Science.
Today's conversation is with Dr.
Sam Friedman.
Sam is a research professor anda faculty member at the Center
for Opioid Epidemiology andPolicy i n the Department of
Population Health at New YorkUniversity's Grossman School of
Medicine, He is also theassociate director of the
Infectious Disease, Epidemiologyand Theory Corp at the Center
(00:38):
for Drug Abuse i n HIV Research.
Carly (00:41):
Today's bonus episode is a brief one.
Unfortunately, we had sometechnical difficulties during
our recording, but our fantasticeditor, Kristina Holsapple was
able to piece together a fewbits of the conversation.
So we hope you enjoy it.
Valerie (01:06):
Alright.
So in this first segment that wewere able, that Kristina was
able to salvage for us, we askedSam about his thoughts on being
a scientist and an activist.
So essentially, you know,whether there is a contradiction
there.
So first off I should say thatSam just doesn't identify as a
scientist.
(01:26):
So that was good to know.
He identifies as a scholar, somaybe I'll need to sort of dig
into some of these identityissues in season two.
Carly (01:35):
I think so.
Valerie (01:36):
Double check that the people we're interviewing
identify a s cientist, who theyare a little bit more deeply.
But more generally, I mean,this, this conversation around
science and activism is one thatI'm really interested in.
I'm really curious as to whetherscientists, especially in our
(01:58):
field identify as activists.
I think that there, some peopleperceive that there's a risk
that identifying as an activistm eans that y our objectivity is
sort of clouded.
And I h ad n ever really thoughtabout this until I was at
Harvard Med School.
(02:19):
So I was a faculty member thereand we were hosting a symposium.
It was on LGBT bullying, and itwas like so interesting.
So there was a panel discussion,which means that there were a
group of people sitting on thestage and they were talking to
each other about differentissues related to bullying.
And it was, it was a greatpanel.
(02:40):
There were, you know, about, Ithink it was l ike just about
half of the folks on the panel were researchers and the other
half w ere community members,including some youth from the
LGBT community in Boston.
And somebody raised their handand they asked t he panel if
they were activists, and likewho identified as an activist?
(03:02):
And I'll never forget it.
Like all of the youth r aisedtheir hand.
One of the scientists, you know,one of the P hDs on the panel
raised a hand and then two ofthem didn't.
And I was just, I was reallysurprised because these two
scientists in particular arepeople who do a lot of research
(03:25):
on structural stigma and who,who have done amazing work on
stigma.
A lot of it, which I think islike calling for social change.
And so I was just reallyinterested that they did not
identify as activists.
And then they took a poll ofthe, of the room, like of the
audience.
And it was still like, i t wasabout like 50/50.
Carly (03:46):
Which is that like, it doesn't line up, you know?
Unless it's one of those thingswhere like, you get so deep into
the research that it's just likea part of your everyday life.
And it doesn't seem, I feel likethe term activism comes with
some sort of like, charge aboutit, you know?
Like there's like a harddefinition of that.
That seems sort of radical, Ithink, in a lot of c ontexts and
like, you know, so maybe once you're, you're doing all that
(04:06):
stigma research t hat like yousaid is so, you know, calls for
activism, you know, most of thetime that you just, not that
you're numb to it, but itdoesn't feel so radical when
that's the work that you'redoing e very d ay.
But.
Valerie (04:19):
Yeah, no, I think that's a really good point.
And so that's why I kind of circled back.
I'm like maybe, maybe the ideais that if they identify as an
activist, a ctivist, then theyworry that their objectivity is
clouded, that they like, youknow, can't be a s trusted with
the d ata or something.
But I mean, I've always s howedup to protests.
(04:41):
I mean, on our Instagramaccount, we have some photos
from Stephanie Chaudoir was onthe podcast out protesting.
I went with her to the Women'sMarch.
And I went most recently to avery super socially distance
protest at our Acme.
I don't know if I told you aboutthat, which is our local grocery
store.
Carly (05:00):
Yes.
Valerie (05:01):
Black Lives Matter movement.
And so I just, I really don'tsee that as, as conflicting,
especially because we havetheory and we have research, I
think showing that like socialchange helps to stop stigma.
So if I'm helping to stop stigmathrough my intervention work
through like my other projects,like why not help to stop stigma
(05:24):
by like going to protests orengagement activism, like, you
know, so anyway, I just, I, Idid raise my hand, so yeah.
So anyway, so we asked Sam thisquestion and, and now you'll
hear him, uh, think through andtalk through what his thoughts
are.
(05:50):
So coming off, you know,thoughts of the revolution, one
of the things I wanted to askyou about, especially since you
were out protesting this week,was your thoughts on sort of the
intersection between being ascientist and being an activist,
and how you see those, those tworoles?
(06:12):
Are they complimentary?
Are they contradictory?
And as I previewed, maybe I'vealready answered this since you
were out protesting this week,but I'd love to hear your
thoughts on that.
Sam (06:22):
I mean, I mean, I see no contradiction.
I'm not sure I'm a scientist.
I tend to think of myself as ascholar.
But, when I wrote my first book,which was called"Teamster Rank
(06:52):
and File", and what a qualitative study of an activist
i n militant local union in LosAngeles of truck drivers.
I made the point that there w asa lot of stuff I couldn't have
understood or learned if I werenot part of a movement that had
(07:20):
worked with those truck driverswhen they were on W ildcat
strike.
And that furthermore, as I thinkeveryone understands the concept
of scientific objectivity isbullshit.
But you can have i s scientificintegrity and honesty and
(07:45):
attempt to understand yourbiases, but that doesn't mean
get rid of them necessarily.
You k now, it means understandwhat you were doing and that
sometimes it's committed tothings.
(08:05):
One of the things I found when Ifirst came to A IDS work was
that all this stuff aboutobjectivity and this, that, and
the other on a certain level wasutter nonsense because all of
these researchers are ganging upon some poor virus.
Valerie (08:29):
Okay.
Sam (08:30):
And all of medicine is committed to killing germs.
That's not objective, that'staking sides.
Valerie (08:40):
I've never thought of it that way.
Carly (08:42):
No, me neither.
That was like one of those likemindblowing...
Valerie (08:46):
Yeah.
Carly (08:46):
Moments for me where I was like, huh, well, well damn.
Valerie (08:50):
Well, I do feel like Sam is the one to question
everything.
Carly (09:04):
A ll r ight.
So then Sam shared with us hisinvolvement in drug user
activism in the 1990s and theearly 2000s, including a
demonstration at the Departmentof Health and Human Services.
Valerie (09:18):
So could you tell us a little bit more maybe about what
act, what activism, or I knowyou've written about, like
social organizations or grouporganizations for drug users,
sort of like sort of what thoseorganizations and movements look
like?
Sam (09:32):
It's hard to generalize.
And there's been some historicalchange.
To begin with, almost all ofthem were student councils for
drug treatment programs.
Valerie (09:50):
Oh! So affiliated with universities?
Sam (09:52):
No.
Affiliated with drug treatmentprograms.
Valerie (09:55):
Oh, okay.
Sam (09:57):
But you know, like a high school student council, which is
a creature of the administrationusually.
Valerie (10:04):
Oh, okay.
Interesting.
Sam (10:05):
However, there were a few real exceptions, and I've
written extensively about thejunky in the Netherlands.
And they were a clear exception,although not all of them, some
of them were at least halfway inbetween.
(10:26):
Let's put it that way.
They were creatures of the drugtreatment program, but that's at
least in part because the peoplein the drug treatment program
were halfway to being part of ajunky move.
It's, but for example, the, andthen there were groups like the
(10:53):
Amsterdam group, which I forgetwhat it, the name was, which was
actually in many ways anorganization of the drug reform
movement rather than of the druguser activist movement, but
cooperative.
So that I was kind of another inbetween thing.
(11:17):
Now over time, huge varieties ofdifferent things.
For example, in Australia,basically they funded drug user
activism from the stategovernment.
Valerie (11:34):
Oh, really?
Sam (11:34):
They wanted to have a voice on AIDS coming from drug users
because it seemed to be workingfor gays.
Valerie (11:42):
Interesting.
Okay.
Sam (11:43):
Now that is an interesting form of organization.
Quite effective in many a ndcertainly effective yelling at
government officials at varioustimes and did a lot of good
outreach and similar work i nsome organizing.
(12:03):
Now we have international bodiesthat have been lasting in
reasonable shape since about2008.
I mean, we'd had predecessorinternational bodies.
And there's some continuity ofthem all the way into the early
(12:28):
nineties.
But none of them almost haveever become mass activists.
There aren't that many drugusers.
Valerie (12:42):
Yeah.
That's interesting.
I mean, we've got all of thisattention on the opioid epidemic
in the US.
At least, you know, pre-COVIDthat was a big part of the
discussion.
And it's interesting because Ihave colleagues who, you know,
will look at their data andthere'll be like,"I don't know
what's wrong with the data thatI collected.
(13:03):
There's not a lot of drug usersin here, but that there's all
this noise about the opioidepidemic.
So where are all the peopleusing opioids in my dataset?"
Sam (13:12):
Well, that's obvious.
They're not telling them.
Valerie (13:15):
That is, yep.
That is true.
Sam (13:17):
It's very hard in a general population survey to get people
to admit drug use.
Valerie (13:27):
S ure.
Sam (13:27):
You know, we've made estimates.
Other people have madeestimates.
Depending how you define it, orsomething like two or 3 million
drug users, opioid users in theUS, probably less than 1%.
Valerie (13:46):
Right.
Sam (13:48):
They're spread all over.
There have been demonstrationswith hundreds of people, but,
you know, at least officiallythey're harm reduction
demonstrations.
It's safer that way.
And often it is harmreductionists.
(14:10):
Many of whom are always ex-drugusers.
Some of whom may not be so e x.
Valerie (14:18):
O kay.
Sam (14:19):
But, you know, I remember a demonstration in the mid 90s, I
think it was at HHS inWashington, several hundred
people screaming about needleexchange.
(14:42):
Of the people who actually hadRO1s at the time.
Valerie (14:49):
So the big research grants that we from the National
Institutes of Health.
Sam (14:53):
Yeah.
That is the people who might beidentifiable to people walking
by.
Valerie (15:01):
O kay.
Sam (15:03):
I mean, there are a few others who might be identifiable
as project directors or thingslike that, or even postdocs,
there were only two of us.
And I've always been very, veryimpressed by David Metsker that
(15:24):
he came.
He also has roots in the drugtreatment world after all.
Valerie (15:31):
Okay.
Sam (15:34):
But yeah, the two of us did it, and there was no retribution
that I know of.
Valerie (15:41):
Okay.
Well, given your careertrajectory and your Avid Guard
award and everything, I wouldsay that you did pretty well
despite, you know, despite theprotest.
So we did some research intothis protest at the Department
(16:08):
of Health and Human Services, orHHS.
So we think that it was in 1997.
And we found out basically thatthere were about 500 to a
thousand people by newspaperreports gathered to protest HHS
secretary, Donna Shalala, andpresident Clinton's inaction on
(16:29):
lifting the ban on federalfunding of needle exchange
programs.
So, you know, by 1997, there'sgood scientific evidence that
these needle exchange programscan effectively like reduce the
spread of HIV and is a reallygood HIV, HIV prevention
strategy for people who injectdrugs.
(16:49):
So we have the data.
And then the problem is thatthere's no federal funding for
this thing that is super, supereffective.
So it looks like the protest wasorganized by the National
Coalition to Save Lives Now.
And my favorite part about thisprotest was that there were 12
(17:11):
protestors who were arrested forattempting to bring a 12 foot
tall replica of a human backboneinto the HHS building.
And they had signs that saidmoral backbone for Clinton and
moral backbone for Shalala.
So this is just my favoritething.
Carly (17:27):
That is such a boss move, you know?
Valerie (17:29):
Yeah, absolutely.
So it really made me feel like,you know, for the next protest
that I go out to, I need to likestep up my game.
Carly (17:38):
Yeah.
You got to get better, morepowerful props, you know.
Valerie (17:41):
I know.
Y eah.
A t the last one I had, youknow, like my sign and then I
wore my Ruth Bader Ginsburgmask, which I felt like was
pretty, pretty g ood.
Carly (17:50):
Yeah.
Those a re, that's pretty b oldtoo.
I mean, it's no backbone, but...
Valerie (17:53):
I t's no backbone.
Like I need to go more vertical.
I n eed to like break out somepaper mache.
Carly (17:59):
Yes, exactly.
Valerie (18:01):
Okay.
Well, so we, we definitelyappreciate some inspiring
stories to keep us going in ourown activism.
Carly (18:09):
Absolutely.
Valerie (18:10):
And moving forward, Thank you to the Stigma and
Health and Inequities Lab at theUniversity of Delaware,
including McKenzie Sarnak, SarayLopez and Alissa Leung.
This episode was edited byKristina Holsapple.
Carly (18:28):
Thanks always to City Girl for letting us use the
music.
And you guys can follow us onInstagram at Sex, Drugs,
Science, no and for updates, oryou guys can email us any
comments, questions, concerns,et cetera, at
sexdrugsnscience@gmail.com.
So that's Sex Drugs, the letterN science at gmail.com.
Valerie (18:50):
Apparently Sex, drugs, and Science w as already taken.
Carly (18:53):
Yeah.
Valerie (18:54):
We'll have to send them an email a nd I'll figure out
who they are.
Carly (18:57):
We can buy the rights.
Valerie (19:00):
Yeah.
All right.
Well, thank you all forlistening.
Speaker 2 (19:23):
[inaudible].
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.