The Support of Scientific Controversy

Several years ago an editorial in Advances, addressing the importance of scientific controversy, concluded that uncritical acceptance of data served neither the clinician nor the patient. ¹ This past year the National Association on Drug Abuse Problems (NADAP) sponsored a conference, “Controversies in Alcoholism and Substance Abuse: The Scientific Approach.” Cosponsorship included, among others, the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) and the Committee on Public Health of the New York Academy of Medicine. One organization that did not cosponsor was the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA). This in and of itself is not particularly remarkable, except that NIDA had previously agreed to cosponsorship until, just prior to the start of the conference, it concluded that two of the moderators were too controversial. Lest one think that the individuals in question were on the “fringe,” it should be emphasized that both were faculty members at one of the more prestigious universities in the country, with one having actually served on a NIDA Advisory Committee.