From: Michael Hughes <michaelmhughes.nul> Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2011 08:43:44 -0500 Archived: Tue, 06 Dec 2011 12:00:45 -0500 Subject: Re: Alien Abduction Experiencer Surveys >From: Kathy Kasten <catraja.nul> >To: <post.nul> >Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2011 16:02:16 +0000 >Subject: Re: Alien Abduction Experiencer Surveys >>From: Michael Hughes <michaelmhughes.nul> >>To: <post.nul> >>Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2011 14:07:35 -0500 >>Subject: Re: Alien Abduction Experiencer Surveys >>>Maybe, you should consult with a shaman or psychotherapist >>>before proceeding with your research. And, as I recommended >>>possibly contacting Dr. Rick Strassman (www.rickstrassman.com) >>>or accessing the government website for information regarding >>>Informed Consent Form. >>>I was hoping the above would be seen as helpful not being >>>critical of your wanting to do the research. >>>Just because someone wants to provide information doesn't >>>mean you should take advantage of their desire to do so. >>While I am a fan of Strassman's work, and of the principle of >>informed consent, Strassman's research involved injecting people >>with a powerful psychedelic (DMT) in an institutional setting. >>A survey, essentially asking questions and receiving answers, in >>no way should be seen as requiring the type of formal paperwork >>and review as a study like Strassman's. A survey is simply a >>survey or information gathering exercise people will voluntarily >>contribute to. >>I don't understand why you think any sort of consent form is >>necessary here=C3=A2=E2=82=AC=E2=80=9Cpeople who provide data are doing= so, >>willinglyand the researchers are not responsible for their >>well-being. >Michael: >I was the staff liaison on UCLA's Human Subject Protection >Committee. Questionnaires and non-invasive studies came under >Federal Regulations. There is nothing simple about "collecting" >data on volunteering subjects. >It looks to me that I am dealing - on this List - with people >who have never done a formal study. >BTW, I am one of the people who called out John Mack in his lack >of developing a protocol and administering an ICF. He set a bad >example as to how a researcher should be interacting with >volunteers. Believed me, he did not set a standard that should >be replicated. His heart was in the right place, but he ignored >having a protocol. He or his institution could have been easily >sued by a volunteer who might have suffered adverse side >effects. >As I said, in my view, UFO researchers are wreckless when >interacting with people willing to volunteer details of their >experiences. Au contraire, Kathy. I've worked with a large number of researchers and postdocs who have conducted surveys, gathering all sorts of information about everything from food choices to attitudes about transgenic laboratory mice. None have required the approval of the IRB that governs the studies with volunteers which take place at the university, such as the psilocybin research I've written about, which required extensive and extremely rigorous review. But a voluntary information gathering exercise does not require some kind of psychological screening or approval of an institution to be ethically sound. Anyone who is uncomfortable taking a survey can simply choose not to take it. I'm puzzled by your insistence on the need for institutional review, and I'm guessing that your personal experiences make you extra attentive to the needs of experiencers. Nothing wrong with that, and I applaud your concern, but surveys are conducted all the time about all sorts of potentially sensitive issues - without any institutional review. So you are factually incorrect. Michael Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast At: http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/program/ These contents above are copyright of the author and UFO UpDates - Toronto. They may not be reproduced without the express permission of both parties and are intended for educational use only.
[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp