The American Diabetes Association has responded to the little incident at a recent meeting, and issued a formal statement.
As many of you are now aware, an incident took place at the American Diabetes Association’s (ADA) Scientific Sessions.
As a 501(c)(3) organization, the ADA has safeguards in place to ensure that it complies with all IRS regulations. This includes maintaining a strictly nonpartisan environment at all organizational events and functions while engaging across party affiliations to advance our mission. We have always, and will continue to welcome scientific inquiry, respectful dialogue, and diverse perspectives in the pursuit of better outcomes for people living with diabetes and obesity.
Oh. They were being nonpartisan
. That claim doesn’t hold up.
When the opposition is ignorant, advancing unscientific ideas, and is using them to consciously dismantle the apparatus of science to silence disagreement, you can’t silence yourself to prevent conflict. They have a political agenda and are distorting and destroying science to achieve it, and conceding the argument in advance with silence is political, too — and it’s favoring their position.
I’m not at all impressed with the cowardly, conservative leadership of the ADA.
I’m not a lawyer, but all 501(c)(3) prohibits an organization from campaigning for and/or endorsing specific candidates and from lobbying. It says nothing about letting attendees at one of your conferences pass out an article critical of the current administration, an article that, I might add, is prefaced with a disclaimer stating that it does not represent the opinion or official position of the ADA. Sadly, the ADA has shown itself all too eager to obey in advance.
“To learn more about how we are advocating for everyone affected by diabetes, visit us on X”
Meet them on X, because Musk’s incel, misogynist, pro-Nazi racist social media website is where all scientists and medical researchers should want to go. Is Diabetes going to be caused more by Tylenol or miasma? /S
Unsurprisingly, their CEO does not even have a medical background, but he has spent “24-plus years in for-profit sectors”. His background is in Economics: B.A.Sc Ag Economics. So now he can add Reich Wing politics to his “accomplishments”.
So when someone makes a speech etc praising Trump’s support for Robert Kennedy’s position that would be condemned too?
“If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice”
The ada formal statement is just another stinking shovelful of mealy-mouthed corporate crap!
None of these corporate aholes care about the populace they are allegedly chartered to serve. The toxic corporate toads running these corporations are just pushing useless bureaucracy and are completely ignorant and dishonest.
The credible scientists paper condemning the insane policies of the NIH administration was NOT partisan or political. It was a statement of medical honesty indicting the corruption of the roadkill fracking kennedy magat cult.
Martha and the Vandellas continue to sing, ‘nowhere to run to baby, nowhere to hide’ (except temporarily by building a boat model, but, not that over-priced crap put out by the half-baked hamm)
Orac already said what I was going to say.
The statement being handed out at the American Diabetes Association (ADA) was not even from the…American Diabetes Association. Which means it is not covered or a subject of their 501(c)(3) agreements with the IRS, one way or another.
It was from a member attending one of their events and they aren’t claiming to speak for the ADA.
There are several things the ADA did wrong here.
.1. Pure cowardice. They are afraid of the Trump regime.
So am I. So is anyone who has a functioning brain and cares about democracy.
I still speak up, donate money to my causes, and I’ve been to so many protests lately, I’ve lost count.
Courage isn’t being unafraid.
It’s being afraid and getting up and opposing the fascists anyway.
.2. Censoring themselves in advance.
So far the government hasn’t done anything and even today, they can’t do much.
It’s too late for ICE to storm the meeting and lob some tear gas canisters.
.3. Obeying in advance.
If they want to grovel in front of a senile orange monster, the least they could do is wait until they send some Stormtroopers after them.
I’m not even remotely involved with the ADA but if I was, I would speak up.
Against the cowardly, ineffectual leadership of that organization.
PZ, you are not the only one who sees this disaster and comments on it:
Diabetes News: ADA Conference Bends Knee to [redacted] by Mokurai
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2026/6/8/800050526/community/diabetes-news/
The ranks of CEOs, for both profit- and nonprofit-organizations are infested with MAGA-friendly greedheads.
It just seems like that level of remuneration results in a serious case of affluenza, for which the mortality rate is far, FAR too low.
The management of ADA clearly is kowtowing due to this administration’s pressure, lest they feel the pain even more.
cf. https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2026/06/08/gdwj-j08.html
↓
and
So the ADA claims to be censoring their own members, using the force of private security and cops, apolitically. Seems legit
/sarc
E = mc^2 is a physics equation derived from the geometry of space-time, as apolitical as possible. In the 30s and 40s, teaching it could you get you sacked from German universities for promoting “degenerate Jewish science”.
Why are we surprised that the ADA is running scared of this administration? They cab see as well as we can that this is a petty but ruthlessly vindictive oligarchy and they don’t want to take any more heat than they have to. They aren’t intrepid resistance fighters battling Emperor Trumpatine on behalf of some Rebel Alliance. They’re academics and administrators, If they turn out to have more backbone it’ll be a pleasant surprise but don’t hold your breath,
George Orwell, “Why I Write” (1946).
So, too, is the decision to silence someone.
“Politics” isn’t necessarily bad; Orwell’s point was that pretending one is apolitical in one’s communications is itself political. It’s the pretense to “pure neutrality” that’s bad.
IIRC, the ADA also has a § 501(c)(4) subsidiary that is allowed to advocate for/against candidates and lobby, in support of its educational mission. Many academic/quasiprofessional organizations either have such a subsidiary or work closely with one, often called a “foundation” or something similar.
There’s nothing in IRS regulations that prohibits a tax-exempt organization from commenting on political matters. What is prohibited is endorsing and campaigning for candidates for office. (Besides, since the IRS has been gutted, these regulations aren’t enforced; look at all the tax-exempt churches that endorse candidates.)
But even if the the organization wants to be “apolitical,” the model used by many such institutions is the Univ. of Chicago model, in which the institution does not make statements or take stands regarding political matters unless the issue directly impacts the institution itself, while leaving individual members free to speak their minds and advocate for issues and candidates. It’s not a perfect model, and one can disagree with it, but it does chart a reasonable course, keeping institutions from being mired in political debate.
Given this, there’s no excuse for what the ADA did.