2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session 2013 special election arts arts and culture author ballot measures bomb books budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration international internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal portland mayor president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes television terrorism theater third parties timber payments transportation union university of oregon violence washington water wildfire women

I am a biology teacher at Portland Community College.  One of the things I really want my non-majors biology students to learn is to use data and critical thinking.  I am disappointed that I am only hearing about actual data with regard to reducing harm programs from the scientist David Duncan, while the scientist from Harvard, Bertha Madras cites no studies.  The discussion leaves me thinking that Bertha Madras has an opinion but no data for me to evaluate.  I am just suppose to take her word for it that harm reduction programs are bad.  Very frustrating to me.  I would like to know what the science is, not what she thinks personally.

posted 3 years, 3 months ago
view in context