Dr Peter Ridd

Dr Peter Ridd made his disclosures through the Federal Court about the alleged use of disciplinary processes in technical disciplines to control and/or influence the contents of public debate about environmental topics of political interest. Dr Ridd’s case is the most prominent of a number of instances where codes of conduct appear to be being used to coerce scientists and engineers to remain silent regarding the facts and opinions on matters of public interest which fall within their areas of experience and expertise. 

Such silence then allows views, more favoured by institutions and/or their funding agencies, an unimpeded flow to the media. In other cases, security, confidentiality and privacy arguments, and defamatory statements made public, can be employed to the same result of silence on those of a contrary view. This is diametrically opposite to the core concept of the scientific method, which relies on testing, contesting and retesting of ideas to achieve progress. It is regretted that, in other cases, conflicts of interest have been allowed to suppress academic publication of opposing scientific and engineering views, not just suppressing debate in the media.

By taking his disclosures to the Court, Dr Ridd has greatly assisted the public to come to know of practices within academic and professional institutions that may be giving a bias to the ‘scientific’ opinion and facts that the public receive through the media.