@Sasha said
Do you think that all those organisations that spent $1m on this will now change their view about the IOM's credentials for writing this report?
How do you think grassroot movements for change start? By asking for things that they know will be accepted? Then there is no need ever for demonstrations. Do you think that the AIDS movement would have accomplished anything if they had given up from the start because the government was not going to change?
Dr, Lee stated that the government is not in the business of creating criteria for disease. Tina stated that this is usual in the US. The fact is that the US, unlike the UK has a privatized medicine. All criteria for disease are created by the private medical experts - not the government.
This was totally unprecedented in the US that the government sponsored a contract with the IOM to create criteria. This is dangerous not just for our case, but this will be a precedent for the ability of the US government to highjack any disease and state: "we don't like your criteria, we will create our own criteria instead". This is not right and should never have happened.
The fact that it did happen, does not mean we need to accept it. Should the freedom fighters not have fought for freedom from slavery because the government already legalized it. Should they have not protested against it?
Should women not have fought for their rights to vote because it was already decided that they could not vote?
Where is the logic in accepting things that we feel are unfair just because the government made a wrong decision?