La Déclaration de Bruxelles sur l’intégrité scientifique soutenue par des scientifiques de renom
Des scientifiques mondialement reconnus soutiennent le lancement de la Déclaration de Bruxelles sur l’intégrité scientifique [1], document qui exige que les éthiques professionnelle et scientifique prévalent sur le bénéfice financier et politique ou sur l’idéologie personnelle.
Ce document est une déclaration des principes appelant au retour de la méthode scientifique comme principe directeur pour qualifier une étude scientifique. Centrée sur l'épidémiologie et la toxicologie, la Déclaration concerne notamment l'alcoolisme, l'obésité et le tabagisme passif.
John Gray, porte parole de la Coalition internationale contre la prohibition (TICAP [2]), affirme: « La Déclaration de Bruxelles est le résultat des résolutions prises lors de la conférence mondiale contre la prohibition du TICAP en Janvier 2009 [3]. La Déclaration a pour but d’ouvrir la voie pour le retour à une intégrité scientifique indéniable et fiable, essentielle pour la crédibilité des institutions scientifiques et l'avancement général de l'humanité. »
Il est souhaité l'adhésion à la Déclaration par les responsables politiques de tous pays et tout niveau gouvernemental, les responsables de communautés, les chercheurs et universitaires, les écrivains, les journalistes et les organisations non gouvernementales.
Ce document complet demande la détermination de normes uniformes et précises concernant la collecte de données des études épidémiologiques, l'indication obligatoire des marges d'erreur et le rejet des avis d'experts fondés sur des études qui ne remplissent pas ces critères de base.
Il exige en plus le rétablissement de la notion de seuil de risque et demande à ce que les gouvernements et agences de régulation rejettent tout travail scientifique qui ne respecte pas ces normes.
Il condamne l'usage d'études non validées comme base pour les politiques publiques et les diverses interdictions et demande l'annulation des politiques et des règlements qui sont fondés sur de telles études.
En plus des conclusions des études scientifiques, il appelle les institutions officielles et les médias à rapporter avec précision les limites et les incertitudes de ces conclusions afin de respecter le droit du public à des informations complètes et exactes et ainsi éviter les appréhensions et la panique inutiles du public.
« Au même titre que les effets de la Déclaration de Manhattan [4] commencent à se faire sentir, tant au niveau du public que politique », poursuit John Gray, « les effets de la Déclaration de Bruxelles se feront sentir au niveau de l'intégrité scientifique quand il s’agit d’interdictions qui affectent nos habitudes et modes de vie. »
Contact : John Gray - Président de TICAP – courriel : info@antiprohibition.org
Porte-paroles
| Pays | Nom | Téléphone | Courriel |
| Danemark | Ole Gilberg | +4562533949 | gilberg@gilberg.dk |
| Allemagne | Christoph Loevenich | +491712048698 | c.loevenich@antiprohibition.org |
| Pays-bas | Wiel Maessen | +31615941282 | w.maessen@antiprohibition.org |
| RU | Bill Gibson | +441576203639 | b.gibson@antiprohibition.org |
[1] http://www.brusselsdeclaration.org/pages/home/
[2] http://antiprohibition.org/index.php?v=1
[3] http://antiprohibition.org/ticap_pages.php?q=12
[4] http://www.climatescienceinternational.org
We seek endorsement of the 'Brussels Declaration on Scientific Integrity' by politicians, community leaders, academics, writers, journalists and non-governmental organisations from all all over the world.
This Brussels Declaration is a statement of ethical and scientific principles calling for the return to the Scientific Method as the guiding qualifier for the definition of a study as scientific. It was initiated during the TICAP conference in Brussels that was held on January 27-28, 2009.
By choosing to sign the Brussels Declaration you have an opportunity to show your support for change and demand your government act to protect your freedoms.
Following the absurd verdict from the Ontario Court of Appeal on the private club issue, Mike Kennedy displayed all the signs of a tired out, discouraged and disillusioned man. The system he believed in and defended with patriotic passion had once again let him down. What was most alarming to him is that the decision the three judges rendered against private smoking clubs is in essence an open invitation for the state to arbitrarily invade our privacy even into our own homes. ‘’This can’t be happening in my Canada’’ he told us in total disbelief.
Indeed, the verdict from the Ontario Court of Appeal has extended the definition of the term ''members of the public who need the protection of the state'' to include anyone who, after being forewarned of the nature of the legal activities that will take place, willingly accepts an invitation to a private gathering in a totally private setting. This is a very loaded verdict that gives the state the necessary power to cross that sacred line that separates private life from public life on the whim of potentially zealous elected officials that might see no problem in using the power such a decision grants them to shamelessly invade our most private spaces as long as they can proudly proclaim that they're doing it for our own good!
‘’I cannot let this happen’’, Mr. Kennedy told us after he picked himself up and dealt with the emotional blow the Ontario Court of Appeal served him ‘’but I just don’t know how I will manage to carry on with the fight. Where will I get the money to bring this case to the Supreme court?’’ he questioned with grave concern. For the first time since the beginning of his combat he felt that he might be forced to call it quits. But luckily for all of us, as the 60-day period to file for leave was coming to an end, a happy turn of events occurred. With a little help from friends with deep democratic values, Mike Kennedy was able to seek pro bono representation from one of the biggest lawyer firms in Canada - Gowling Lafleur Henderson - in his pursuit to protect private property rights in Canada through the highest court of the country. Only expenses will be charged to him which are estimated between three and five thousand dollars that he hopes to fund raise between now and the hearing if the leave is granted.
We commend Mr. Kennedy for his perseverance and courage to not only have prepared and personally presented his previous cases against a very powerful and wealthy bureaucratic machine, but to have the strength to carry on with the fight until he’s satisfied that justice has been rendered for privacy and democracy in his Canada - in our Canada. If the leave is granted, we will assist Mr. Kennedy every way we possibly can and stand alongside of him all through the final phase of his long battle. We hope every freedom loving individual in Canada and elsewhere, will too.
If you want to write or donate to Mr. Kennedy, please address your letter or pledge to mikekennedy@cagecanada.ca and we will make sure he gets it and communicates directly with you if he so wishes.
Posts
All Comments
