Trump says his comments on injecting disinfectants were “sarcastic.” Let’s review the tape.; Vox, April 24, 2020

Aaron Rupar, Vox; Trump says his comments on injecting disinfectants were “sarcastic.” Let’s review the tape.

Spoiler alert: He’s lying.

"President Donald Trump now claims he was being “sarcastic” when he mused on Thursday about disinfectant injections being a possible miracle cure for the coronavirus.

Unfortunately for him, there’s video.

Asked during a White House bill-signing ceremony on Friday to explain his comments — which were widely mocked for being ridiculous and more than a little irresponsible, became the top trending topic on Twitter, and prompted warnings from health agencies that it’s actually a bad idea to inject or consume bleach — Trump tried to rewrite history.

“I was asking a sarcastic, and a very sarcastic question, to the reporters in the room about disinfectant on the inside,” Trump lied. In reality, he was looking at White House officialswhen he earnestly asked them to investigate whether there’s “a way we can do something like that, by injection inside or almost a cleaning. Because you see it gets in the lungs, and it does a tremendous number on the lungs. So it would be interesting to check that.”

Notably, even as he tried to distance himself from his remarks, Trump illustrated his fundamental inability to ever admit a mistake by continuing to defend his premise.

Disinfectant “does kill it, and it would kill it on the hands, and that would make things much better,” Trump said.

Watch the two clips back to back for yourself:"

Job search ethics: The good, the bad, and the ugly; Science, June 14, 2017

David G. Jensen, Science; Job search ethics: The good, the bad, and the ugly

"It’s tough to write about ethics. There’s always a chance that I’ll sound like I’m preaching, which isn’t a great style for a columnist. And I’ve had my own job market infractions, so I’m not squeaky clean. But it’s an important topic, so here we go. The bottom line is that there’s a good way to handle certain elements of the job search, a bad way—and an ugly, dirty way. Follow the lessons in these examples to keep clean."

In N.F.L., Deeply Flawed Concussion Research and Ties to Big Tobacco; New York Times, 3/24/16

Alan Schwarz, Walt Bogdanich, Jacqueline Williams, New York Times; In N.F.L., Deeply Flawed Concussion Research and Ties to Big Tobacco:

"With several of its marquee players retiring early after a cascade of frightening concussions, the league formed a committee in 1994 that would ultimately issue a succession of research papers playing down the danger of head injuries. Amid criticism of the committee’s work, physicians brought in later to continue the research said the papers had relied on faulty analysis.

Now, an investigation by The New York Times has found that the N.F.L.’s concussion research was far more flawed than previously known.

For the last 13 years, the N.F.L. has stood by the research, which, the papers stated, was based on a full accounting of all concussions diagnosed by team physicians from 1996 through 2001. But confidential data obtained by The Times shows that more than 100 diagnosed concussions were omitted from the studies — including some severe injuries to stars like quarterbacks Steve Young and Troy Aikman. The committee then calculated the rates of concussions using the incomplete data, making them appear less frequent than they actually were.

After The Times asked the league about the missing diagnosed cases — more than 10 percent of the total — officials acknowledged that “the clubs were not required to submit their data and not every club did.” That should have been made clearer, the league said in a statement, adding that the missing cases were not part of an attempt “to alter or suppress the rate of concussions.”

One member of the concussion committee, Dr. Joseph Waeckerle, said he was unaware of the omissions. But he added: “If somebody made a human error or somebody assumed the data was absolutely correct and didn’t question it, well, we screwed up. If we found it wasn’t accurate and still used it, that’s not a screw-up; that’s a lie.”

These discoveries raise new questions about the validity of the committee’s findings, published in 13 peer-reviewed articles and held up by the league as scientific evidence that brain injuries did not cause long-term harm to its players. It is also unclear why the omissions went unchallenged by league officials, by the epidemiologist whose job it was to ensure accurate data collection and by the editor of the medical journal that published the studies."

Lawmaker proposes revamp of Pittsburgh Ethics Committee that last met in 2008; WPXI.com, 9/30/15

WPXI.com; Lawmaker proposes revamp of Pittsburgh Ethics Committee that last met in 2008:

According to the city’s website, the Ethics Hearing Board was established to maintain high standards of personal integrity, truthfulness and fairness among employees. However, the mayor’s office said the board’s last meeting took place in November 2008...

This week Gilman proposed legislation to fix what he calls the loopholes in the city’s ethics system. He wants to create a new board staffed with experts independent from City Hall and with whistleblower protection.

"If they speak out about something, they're not going to face reprisal from the people who have power. The thing about power is that it always needs to be checked,” Dr. Alex John London, of Carnegie Mellon University’s Center for Ethics and Policy, said."