When the hounds are at the door . . .

1. When the hounds are at the door . . . Earle Holland Director, Research Communications Ohio State University

2. Within the past two weeks … • “OSU Under Fire For Animal Testing –School Says Mice, Rats Necessary For Research On Spinal-Cord Injuries” – The Columbus Dispatch, 7/17/04. • “Careful Move Costs OSU Thousands” – The Columbus Dispatch, 7/22/04. • “September Date Arranged For Research Facility Completion” – The Lantern, 7/22/04.

3. Quick Overview of Research Communications … • Part of Office of University Relations; • Informally staffed to Office of Research; • Four science writers including director; • Produces 180 research stories annually reporting findings, discoveries, advances, etc., plus additional stories for in-house periodicals, other projects; • Responsible for crisis communications involving research across campus.

4. Case Studies . . . • Michael Podell/FIV/Methamphetamine – 2000-2002. • West Campus Biocontainment Facility (BSL3) -- 2003-2004. • Spinal cord injury course – 2004-present.

5. Podell/FIV/Methamphetamine • May-June 2000: vet professor Michael Podell responds to an RFP from the National Institute On Drug Abuse; submits proposal; informally told he’s getting grant. • July 2000: We issue release outlining the proposed research – “Study Of FIV Could Lead To Treatments Against AIDS.” • We release seven-page companion backgrounder/factsheet on the program – “A Feline Model of NeuroAIDS and Drug Abuse.” • Opposition from local animal rights group (POET) begins. • October 2000: grant is official, research begins, we issue release – “National Institute Approves Study Of FIV and Methamphetamine Use; May Lead To Better AIDS Treatments.” • Series of demonstrations begin – this will continue for three years.

6. Podell/FIV/Methamphetamine – cont’d What was done right: • Principal investigator was on-board • Animal facilities were accessible • Institution was openly responding • Nature of research was reasonably understandable and had readily perceivable value.

7. Podell/FIV/Methamphetamine – cont’d Subsequent events: • Media coverage focused on controversy, not research • Forced into defensive mode • Dismay over lack of public institutional backing – University and NIDA • POET received support and aid from PETA and PCRM • PCRM convinces USDA to do surprise inspection of animal care regarding this project – we pass, issue release, “Federal Inspector Approves Of University’s Animal Care Program” – March 2002 • Protests/demonstrations on campus every 4-6 weeks • Vandalism: Administration bldg, trustee’s business, president’s home • Death threats to PI, kids accosted at school, threats to home

8. Podell/FIV/Methamphetamine – cont’d What was done wrong: • Failure to correct PI naivete • Failure to convince leadership to defend this research

9. Podell/FIV/Methamphetamine – cont’d • First results published, Journal of NeuroVirology – June 2002 • We issue release: “Methamphetamine Drastically Increases Virus’ Ability To Replicate In Brain Tissue.” A controversial research study here has found that exposing cells infected with feline immunodeficiency virus - a surrogate for HIV - to methamphetamine increases those cells' ability to replicate the deadly virus as much as 15-fold. The finding, if confirmed by ongoing animal studies, could answer important questions about how lentiviruses such as FIV and HIV can gain a foothold in the brain. That knowledge is vital in slowing or lessening the dementia that often accompanies AIDS and similar diseases.

10. Podell/FIV/Methamphetamine – cont’d Then Podell quits . . . • is leaving research as well as leaving OSU … • blames institution for not backing him up … • mandates that university not release info on his plans … Media has a field day – NYT, Chronicle of Higher Ed, TIME, Nature, Science, Science News, New Scientist, etc. TIME’s headline: “A Win For The Kitties” NYT: “Debate Over Whether To Defend Animal Tests” Chronicle: “Cat Researcher Says Animal-Rights Activists Hounded Him Out Of Academe”

11. Podell/FIV/Methamphetamine – cont’d Ultimately … • Work began anew with alternate PIs within six months under new protocol; • New PIs have no interest in discussing the project; • Animal rights opposition actually did win; • University faculty perceive it as failure of institution to back up researchers.

12. West Campus Biocontainment Facility (BSL3) -- 2003-2004 Will be third BSL3 lab on campus • Biosciences Bldg lab operational since 1970s • Primate Center lab operational since mid-1990s Small, modular construction, located off main campus Will be designated facility for select agent work at OSU. Will be most secure facility on campus! Lab director, campus biosafety officer and Res. Comm. devised plan to announce construction of facility and subsequent research to head off controversy.

13. West Campus Biocontainment Facility (BSL3) -- 2003-2004 The beginning of the end of the beginning . . . • Senior institutional leadership reject plan to announce lab construction early – elect to “lay low” for several months • Occupants of bldg adjacent to site learn of new neighbors • Contact student newspaper which does story, followed by AP story and all local media – coverage highly negative • Speech and Hearing Clinic and daycare center is in adjacent building – fear for safety and loss of clinic revenue

14. West Campus Biocontainment Facility (BSL3) -- 2003-2004 • July 2003, we issue release waiting three months – “University To Open New Lab To Study Infectious Diseases” • Followed by backgrounder/fact sheet • Immediately have two-hour “town meeting” session with occupants of adjacent bldg; VP research, biosafety officer, animal care director, lab director and second PI, and Res. Comm. director all attend to respond to concerns. • Second “town meeting” held week later. • Mtng with mayor, fire & police chiefs, and EMS personnel from neighboring suburb meet to discuss lab concerns. • Mayor writes column for local paper, citing mtng and says they are confident in the lab’s safety.

15. West Campus Biocontainment Facility (BSL3) -- 2003-2004 • Biosafety staff draft new emergency plans for adjacent bldg., meet with occupants to explain procedures; • Animal care director meets with occupants to deal with long-standing perception problems involving vivarium in bldg.; • Release issued as construction begins – “Construction Begins On New Biosafety Laboratory” • Open house planned post completion/pre-containment • Video and still images stockpiled of BSL3 lab interior for potential need later

16. West Campus Biocontainment Facility (BSL3) -- 2003-2004 What went wrong: • Failure of leadership to initiate announcement of lab, forced institution into defensive role

17. Spinal cord injury course – 2004-present • NIH-supported course to teach uniform procedure for producing precise spinal injuries for research; • Rats and mice are animal models; • Class directed at research scientists, post-docs, junior faculty, grad students who are now doing research on, or who plan on having a career studying, this kind of injury • Classes will be conducted in lab bldg but “students” housed in prestige hotel on campus – (concern over image) • Course runs for three weeks

18. Spinal cord injury course – 2004-present • POET contacts PCRM, alerting them to course; PCRM initiates letter-writing campaign against OSU to try to halt the class; PETA issues “Action ALERT” against OSU class. • Met with research team in advance of course to discuss security, media interest, images/cameras, protests, etc. • Initiate email response system using detailed statement explaining course; same statement used to respond to media inquiries; to date, responded to 380 emails and two dozen snail mail complaints.

19. Spinal cord injury course – 2004-present • Six daily protests during first week of course • Media coverage minimal – several radio stories, one TV crew covering – no story, and several print stories

20. When the hounds are at the door . . . Key points: Long-term, pre-existing partnership between communications, biosafety, lab animal, Office of Research representatives; should include periodic meetings, crisis drills, and pre-thought-out plans of action. [Applies to all other research risk “players”] Proactive, initiating philosophy on release of information concerning research risks episodes; first story sets the tone for all that follow. Leadership must have trust in recommendations of those staffed to handle these events.