by Tia Will
As these links are posted, I think it important that each be seen not solely through the eyes of the Daleiden group, which is conducting “investigative journalism” not through any attempt to answer the question of whether or not Planned Parenthood is involved in any illegal activities but rather starting with the firm belief that they are guilty. This group has demonstrated its willingness to engage in deceitful practices to “prove” their basic assertion. As full disclosure I want all to know that I am not, and never have been in any way, affiliated with Planned Parenthood. I do not, in fact, know whether or not any of their affiliates have ever engaged in any illegal activity. What I wish to do is to examine the evidence as put forward by the Daleiden group to see if what they are presenting as proof, does indeed prove what they claim.
So far I have watched the entirety of the first three tapes and have, on only the basis of the information presented so far, come to the conclusion that none of these tapes support the premise that there is any illegal activity in the form of selling fetal tissue for profit.
I would now like to summarize the interview with Dr. Ginde who is the Medical Director of the Rocky Mountain affiliate of PP. The previous interviews with Dr. Nucatola and Dr. Gatter were conducted in California.
This time I have more carefully noted the times for confirmation, if desired, and have starred my interpretation of the potential meaning of what is heard on the tape based on my experience in this field, to easily distinguish my interpretation from what is actually documented on the tapes.
24 secs
Dr. Ginde states “I think a per-item thing works a little better just because we can see how much we can get out of it.”
* This is being portrayed as though it were the beginning of the interview and there is no preceding statement to provide the context in which she is making this statement.
* The taped portion of the interview is not temporally consistent with the actual interview which started in the morning in the office of Dr. Ginde. The segment first shown is actually from later in the day taken in the lab .
* The Daleiden group is attempting to portray this as a reference to how much money can be obtained. What is not clear in this initial segment is that they are standing in the lab having just been inspecting fetal tissue, and her reference is clearly to how much tissue could be retrieved for research purposes since several they wanted as much intact tissue as possible.
2:32
Dr. Ginde points out that if the patient miscarries prior to a planned procedure the specimen will be intact but not available for research purposes due to the tight time constraints for packing and shipping.
The Daleidin interviewer then states : “So obviously we want product that we can use. I think that the biggest thing is that we want to avoid paying for material that we’re not going to be able to process.
* Dr. Ginde has said nothing at all about payment or compensation. Only the Daleiden group has made any such statement. Only the Daleiden group has referred to the donated tissue as “product.”
3:22
Female interviewer states, “So compensation could be specific to the specimen?”
*Dr. Ginde has made no comment about cost, price, compensation or any other monetary consideration.
3:32
Dr. Ginde states that they would need criteria from the Daleiden group about what makes a specimen usable by their group.
4:20
On the subject of the suitability of tissue obtained :
Dr. Ginde notes with regard to different providers:“It’s hard to know how their specimens come out right now because it’s not like we have been looking.” This is supported by her previous comment in which she states that she does not know if she would recognize a thymus, which is one of the items desired by the Daleiden group.
*With regard to this particular affiliate in Colorado, it is now clear that they have not been selling fetal tissue. They have not even been looking at the specimens to determine their degree of intactness. Their director is clearly not familiar with the requirements of transferring tissue for research purposes and has to inquire what the criteria would be. This would clearly not be the case if she had been engaged in selling tissue.
Dr. Ginde states “We would have to kind of see the baseline of how things are getting extracted now, and then see if we could do any work with them to maybe be a little more gentle.
* As a practicing gynecologist, more gentle is good as far as tissue removal is concerned, since it is also more gentle for the patient as I have explained previously with regard to choice of instrument and technique. I can assert this based not on speculation but the knowledge that an intact extraction of tissue rather than multiple passes to remove fragmented tissue will be far better for the patient. This is the same procedure that is used to remove tissue from the uterus when there has been a spontaneous intrauterine fetal death, a common procedure which I have done many times in my career, so I have direct experience with this procedure.
4:54
Dr. Ginde states that with regard to all PP groups that the Daleiden company might be partnering with, “I think that we have to be coordinated with each other.”
Mr. Daleiden interjects: “To make sure that the stories are straight,” to which Dr. Ginde responds: “Well, to make sure that we are all saying the same thing and that the CEOs are all saying the same thing.”
*Coordination is done all the time in Kaiser by all departments to make sure that there is uniformity of performance so that processes run smoothly and so that the patient gets the same standard of care whether she presents to Sacramento, or Davis, or Roseville. This is only possible if the clinics are in communication with each other. There is nothing nefarious or underhanded about coordination of care, although that is clearly Mr. Daleiden’s interpretation.
5:22
Female interviewer says: “ We all know for example, compensation, I want to come in and pay you top dollar because I know what you are going to be facing and I want you to be happy. I want to make sure our suppliers and happy, so compensation, ok your cost is negligent . (*I believe that she meant negligible.)
*Again, the female interviewer stresses, as she did in the Nucatola and Gatter interviews, that she “wants them to be happy.” None of these three doctors have said anything at all about an amount of money that they want or that would make them happy. All any of them have mentioned is cost reimbursement for their services, not for the tissue.
5:46
Female interviewer states with regard to provision of compensation:“We all know that yes, that is what we are doing.”
Dr. Ginde says :“So processing and time, and ….. yeah.”
No mention of compensation for fetal parts is ever mentioned by Dr. Ginde.
6:05
Dr. Ginde: “Because even though we’re doing it through research, if it comes up as someone else is just doing it as a sort of business venture, it puts a different spin on it.”
Mr. Daleiden then says: “ Publically communicating it as a as a research rather than a business venture makes it look better.”
To which Dr. Ginde replies: “I may need to talk to Deb ( Dr. Nucatola). I do want the other Planned Parenthoods….I want all of us to be making the same decision. So if we all decide that we are going to do it outside of research then we do it outside of research. But if we all decide to do it under research, that we have a different path , that we know that we’re all registering and doing the same thing.”
*Note that she is referencing what someone else might do, not what PP does.
This portion of the tape concludes with Daleiden rep inquiring about the PP use of lawyers. Dr Ginde states that no one wants to be accused of selling fetal parts across state lines and that she believes that their lawyer has it figured out.
*She does not say that no one wants to be caught selling fetal parts, she states that no one wants to be accused of it. Daleiden agrees.
The tape then picks up in the lab with a specimen dish containing fetal tissue.
Dr. Ginde is able to identify some, but not all of the fetal parts. Mr. Daleiden has to point out what some of the issues are and it is he who is able to identify the intact kidneys. It is he who states which tissues are in high demand for research such as the brain and the eyes. Dr. Ginde is able to identify the heart, lungs and stomach.
*At no point in this tape does Dr. Ginde mention price, profit, or wanting any compensation for any fetal parts. She states clearly that the consideration is for time and process.
My conclusions from watching the entirety of this tape are:
- The Rocky Mountain affiliate represented by Dr. Ginde has not been engaged in the sales of fetal parts.
- This is the first time that this affiliate has been approached with the possibility of partnering in this way for the transfer of fetal tissue for research, at least during the tenure of Dr. Ginde based on her statements.
- Any words about the sale of fetal tissue were stated by the Daleiden group, not by Dr. Ginde.
- At no point in time are there any specific comments about how much money might be appropriate, nor is any bargain struck. The only agreement is that Dr. Ginde will discuss the issues involved with Dr. Nucatola.
- It does not appear to me that this tape provides any proof of illegal activity in the form of tissue sales and, indeed, might be seen as confirming that these have not occurred.
I remain interested in hearing your interpretations and will be available intermittently over the weekend to discuss any comments that arise.
” ” Mr. Daleiden then says: “ Publicly communicating it as a research rather than a business venture makes it look better.” ”
So Daleiden himself was actually sitting there with the PP women when discussing this? I misunderstood that he sent some of his like minded group to do the interviews.
Wow, a religious pro-lifer is referring to a human aborted fetus as “product.” I feel kinda sick.
Does he have a science degree or any training whatsoever in the activities that he is describing to the PP women? It seems like he is really misrepresenting himself and the goals of his political group/”medical research” group.
Tia, again, thank you for taking the time to review the complete tapes and write this article, which provides so much more info than I’ve read anywhere else.
Daleiden was in Colorado, or did he do this by phone? But he wasn’t in the CA. interview, right? Wow.
sisterhood
In the interests of complete honesty, I do not know that the voice of the male interviewer belongs to Mr. Daleiden. This is an assumption on my part and I am glad that you pointed this out to me.
For an accurate summary, please mentally insert “male interviewer” every time I refer to Mr. Daleiden in this and my previous article.
And please note, as with my previous correction, how easy it is to make assumptions when all of the information is not provided in a clear, unedited, transparent format.
Planned Parenthood recently stated that Daleiden spliced together 6 minutes out of a 2 hour meeting to make one of his crazy tapes.
I wonder why his mother Gina doesn’t disavow his activities. Could it be that she’s afraid of him?
[moderator] Please avoid these personal comments.]
Well, Don… Davis pretty muc opened te door with the first piece, where he wrote that he had contacted the Deputy Co Supervisor for comment. He was out of line then, as tj is now.
tj
“I wonder why his mother Gina doesn’t disavow his activities. Could it be that she’s afraid of him?”
I try very hard not to stifle conversation on the Vanguard. However, I am sincerely hoping that this kind of speculation will not take off. I consider my daughter, the same age as Mr. Daleiden, to be an adult who is fully responsible for her own choices and actions. I no longer feel that her adult choices are a reflection on me whether for good or for ill, she is her own person.
Who is to say anyone should disavow his activities anyway? I’m sure a huge part of the populace see Mr. Daleidan’s actions and investigative reporting as heroic. This story is still playing out and let’s see where it leads. So far there are some pretty horrific revelations that have come out.
revelations? accusations would be a much more accurate description. Until validated, they do not rise to the level of certainty of “revelations.”
I concur wholeheartedly Tia and Don.
Yep, please leave the mother out of these discussions, he is a grown adult. Give her some privacy.
BP
“So far there are some pretty horrific revelations that have come out.”
Since the story, as elucidated in the tapes to data ,has not provided any evidence of a PP member making any suggestion that what they are doing is “selling body parts” and that the tapes show, so far, only the practice of collection and provision of tissue for research purposes which is legal if donated, as has been made clear again and again that the tissue is being donated, I am not sure what you are citing as the “pretty horrific revelations”.
Now if you find the collection of fetal tissue as “horrific” I would agree that to anyone not in medicine, this taped material is doubtless “horrific”. But then corneal collection, or the harvesting of a kidney from a donor might also appear “horrific” to someone who has never seen a dissection or a major surgery. If no laws have been broken, which to date their is no evidence provided on these tapes that any have been, at least by the PP doctors or affiliates taped to date, then “horrific” lies in the eyes of the beholder. Barring any such proof, all Mr. Daleiden and company have “revealed” is that some people do not approve of abortion, and others will be “horrified” by grisly sights just as I have been horrified by the sight of children with missing limbs, or blinded by our overseas military operations.
“….all Mr. Daleiden and company have “revealed” is that some people do not approve of abortion, and others will be “horrified” by grisly sights…”
Because the revalation is visual, that “all” is sufficient!
Sufficient for some, deficient for others. That is the American Way.
I see nothing wrong with deception to get the truth out of scumbags that are trying to hide it. However, the deception that is so disgusting here is not that the Daleiden group lied to Planned Parenthood. The disgusting and essentially fraudulent thing is that they selectively edited the tape to create a false and misleading version of “reality,” one consistent with their political or religious agenda. The Daleiden group, not Planned Parenthood, is the scumbag in this story. Oink!
Napoleon Pig Iv
“I see nothing wrong with deception to get the truth”.
I struggle with this idea. I suppose that if there were an objective “greater good” or a “universal truth” to be arrived at, I would agree with this concept. In this case, “the truth ” seems to be that because they find abortion abhorrent, all other rules can be suspended.
I see a huge irony in a “Christian based” group being willing to break one of the Ten Commandments themselves “Though shall not bear false witness….” in order to implicate others in what by now they surely must realize is not the case even if they felt it was at at the beginning of their investigation. However, to continue to lie even when your initial belief has been demonstrated to be in error is unconscionable
Tia, I basically agree with you, and I very strongly agree with this statement: “However, to continue to lie even when your initial belief has been demonstrated to be in error is unconscionable.”
I suppose in saying that deception is sometimes justified, I’m thinking of cases in which law enforcement personnel infiltrate criminal organizations, or set up sting operations. I don’t, of course, believe that only agents of the government are justified in such actions, but that’s a different and longer philosophical discussion.
In this particular case, I have no doubt at all that Planned Parenthood is an honest organization serving an important need (which is not the same thing as personally being in favor of abortion). The only motivation I can see for the Daleiden group is either a narcissistic desire for publicity or the irrationality of religious belief. Neither justify their lies and misleading propaganda.
No mention of this quote from the video in the above article. If everything PP is doing is legal then why any worry about getting caught?
BP
“We have to know who else is doing this,” Ginde says, “because if you have someone in a really anti state who’s going to be doing this for you, they’re probably gonna get caught.
“No mention of this quote from the video in the above article. If everything PP is doing is legal then why any worry about getting caught?”
Fair question. I addressed it but only obliquely. Dr. Ginde made a point about people who were processing and transporting tissue for profit which is a different issue than “selling the tissue”. PP does neither since they do not process and transport the tissue. It was groups that are engaged in these transfers that she was referring to and she also noted “no one wants to be accused of selling fetal tissue” not “no one wants to be caught selling fetal tissue”.
Again BP, I understand that you are opposed to abortion. I understand that you find these images and conversations horrific. However, the accusation here is not of being horrific, or disgusting, or religiously unacceptable, the issue is illegality, and so far, there is no evidence of this in the words of the PP representatives even with the very leading comments of the interviewers.
Actually, BP informed us a few days ago that he was pro-choice and had “no dog in this fight.” It’s just that liberals like Planned Parenthood, therefore BP likes to see them harmed. And the end justifies the means.
Beneath you, Don. Remember that ‘let’s not get personal’ admonition you gave the other day? Please don’t start talking like Trump (yeah, might be ‘personal’, but he has chosen to be a
pubicpublic figure, so not sure that should count). Listen to your “better angels” (sorry, didn’t mean to bring religion into this).With some contributors (and, justifiably, they could lay this charge on me) “consider the source”.
Don Shor, how many times have you cried about Frankly and others putting words in your mouth? But here you are doing just that to me? I said I wasn’t against abortion as long as it’s not late term. But if Daleidan has proof that PP is breaking the law why can’t we all just let this play out? I’m not in the camp where liberals are automatically attacking him and his colleagues and trying to discredit him before all the facts come forward. You have to admit some very compromising statements and facts have arisen that most people had no idea was occurring.
Before Daleidan how many posters on here can honestly admit that they knew that PP was selling fetal parts to stem cell research firms either for profit or just breaking even, however that might play out?
You’re pro-choice. The end justifies the means.
Um, no, that’s not the case.
Ah. Moving the goal posts. Most people have no idea that tissue is used for anything, anywhere, that it is procured from bodies or fetuses by anyone for anything. Most people have no awareness whatsoever of the entire biomedical research field or how specimens are procured for it. So it’s pretty pointless to talk about what people “knew” about this. Does Sacramento Medical Center procure tissue and convey it to researchers? Do you know? Do you care? Did you ever even think about this before?
Planned Parenthood doesn’t sell fetal parts. To repeat the words “selling fetal parts” is to participate in the lie that Mr. Daleiden wishes to perpetuate. You and your fellow conservatives are being manipulated by gross distortions using “evidence” procured by falsehoods and deceit. Yet you think that’s fine? Then, ipso facto, you believe that the end justifies the means.
I knew, I just had no idea that an agency that gets about half of it’s funding from our government was supplying fetal tissue to them just as I think most people have heard of stem cell research but at the same time had no idea that PP was supplying these companies with organ parts.
Then where did you or “most people” think they were getting their tissue from? And why does it matter to you or “most people”?
BP, it is useful to look at one of the two graphics that I posted earlier in the week. I’ve reposted it below. From FactCheck.org we get the following that puts the graphic into perspective
Armed with that objective information it is crystal clear that the 70% of Planned Parenthood’s 2008-2009 Revenues (33% plus 37%) that could arguably be attributed to Governmental programs/reimbursement is the result of the 97% of Planned Parenthood’s activities that are not related to abortions, and that further, the 3% of Planned Parenthood’s activities that are abortion services are paid for from the 28% of Planned Parenthood’s revenues that comes from Private Contributions.
BP
“But if Daleidan has proof that PP is breaking the law why can’t we all just let this play out?”
And if he has no proof, which he certainly has not demonstrated to date, then he just gets a free pass to make false representations to stir up those who are his ideologic partners so as to attempt to close PP thus preventing women from obtaining, not just abortions, but any of the other offered services. That is certainly why I can’t “just let this play out”. There is far too much at stake as far as women’s health and well being are concerned.
“Before Daleidan how many posters on here can honestly admit that they knew that PP was selling fetal parts to stem cell research firms either for profit or just breaking even”
If posters are being honest, they cannot say that they know that PP was selling fetal parts for any purpose. The doctors have stated repeatedly that they do not engage in selling fetal parts but that some affiliates accept compensation for staff time and space, not for fetal tissue which is being donated. That you choose to accept the interpretation of the Dalieden group over the repeated statements of the doctors, who remember, do not know that they are being recorded, but believe that they are speaking to a transport company is a reflection of your desired interpretation, not of any proof of guilt.
All just a play on words. PP is selling the tissue either to cover their costs or to make a profit, we don’t know, the verdict is still out.
False.
“…proof that PP is breaking the law…”
Haven’t seen any proof of that.
“liberals are automatically attacking him…”
Here is Webster’s definition of liberal:
I
1. Possessing a free or generous heart: bountiful.
2. Appropriate and/or fitting for a broad and enlightened mind.
3. Free from narrowness, bigotry or bondage to authority or creed.
II
1. Any person who advises liberty of thought, speech or action.
Here’s another definition that I find more fitting:
Yeah, that sounds about right.
Ironic source you chose, since it pointed me to this quote:
The 3% myth….
http://nypost.com/2015/08/03/planned-parenthoods-pathetic-3-percent-lie/
BP, with all due respect, first you ask us to follow the money, which was done, and when Factcheck.org illuminated the fact that PP does not get any of its Governmental revenues from/for abortion services, the focus is changed to numbers of procedures. Perhaps, before you change the dialogue it would be “honest” to first acknowledge that the original misuse of (immoral use of?) Governmental funds is erroneous.
Regarding the NY Post article, ALL of healthcare counts procedures/services the way that Planned Parenthood does. Are you really arguing that Planned Parenthood should follow a different procedure/service counting methodology fron the rest of the whole American healthcare system? You and Rich Lowry of the NY Post are tilting at windmills. Note, Richard A. “Rich” Lowry is the editor of National Review, the American conservative magazine of news and opinion, as well as a syndicated columnist, author, and conservative political commentator. The fact that he is making a pro-life argument is not a surprise. Lowry has attacked Planned Parenthood multiple times in the past.
Lowry is willing to push the envelope on other conservative issues as well. At a 2014 forum in Washington, D.C. Lowry said, “The next time I hear a Republican strategist or Republican politician say that there are jobs that Americans won’t do, that person should be shot, he should be hanged, he should be wrapped in a carpet and thrown in the Potomac River.”
Matt, with all due respect, but you have to resort to attacking the messenger when he makes a valid point that PP counts taking a pregnancy test the same as an abortion as far as the way they tally their numbers in order to try and mask the fact that indeed abortions count for much more than PP’s supposed 3% number.
BP, with all due respect Planned Parenthood is not counting the way they are to mask anything. They are counting the way they are because that is the way every healthcare provider and every insurance company in America counts. Lowry’s point is the farthest thing from valid.
An assessment of the possible validity of Lowry’s point would start with the following question, “Why is that what is expected from Aetna and Blue Cross and Sutter and UCDMC and Dignity Health and Kaiser Permanente and thousands and thousands of other healthcare providers is expected/acceptable for Planned Parenthood?” Mr. Lowry’s point is made even more invalid because the healthcare industry’s standard method of counting procedures/services has been in place for many decades. I’m not sure where you think that my fundamental observation about coding standards is in any way attacking the messenger. Quite to the contrary, it is making a very straightforward objective factual observation about the message you have chosen to share.
With that very clear, unequivocal observation about the total fallaciousness of the message you chose to quote, I will again observe that your failure to vet your information, and Rich Lowry’s failure to vet his information is an example of tilting at windmills. If you want to make a moral argument against abortion, then make a moral argument. Don’t take numbers that you don’t understand the meaning of and try and draw conclusions from those numbers. If you or Mr. Lowry had even a rudimentary understanding of the standards that are in place for reporting of activity in the healthcare industry, then you wouldn’t make that mistake in your argumentation. The authority you should be citing counts sermons, not healthcare procedures/services.
Matt, that would be akin to a construction company that built two buildings in a year, one an outhouse and the other a 20 story office high-rise, counting them both the same and saying that the 20 story building was only half their business. People are smarter than that and if they have half a brain can see through these numbers and realize that abortions are far more than only 3% of PP’s business.
“Don’t take numbers that you don’t understand the meaning of and try and draw conclusions from those numbers. ”
“The authority you should be citing counts sermons, not healthcare procedures/services.”
I couldn’t have said it any better, or even half as good. I worked at a nutrition program, dealt firsthand w/ Planned Parenthood for a number of years.
“People are smarter than that and if they have half a brain can see through these numbers and realize that abortions are far more than only 3% of PP’s business.”
Palin, if you have true statistics to prove that the number of abortions is far greater than 3%, you need to either put up or shut up because those are the true statistics, three percent; you’ve nothing to base your comment on but your religious bias against this fine organization of hardworking women & men who save countless lives every year providing excellent preventative health care for low income vulnerable at risk women. You should walk a mile in their shoes and stop judging them.
You should be thankful for your economic situation and try to have some compassion for people who have not had the breaks you’ve had.
Peace.
sisterhood: “… if you have true statistics to prove that the number of abortions is far greater than 3%, you need to either put up or shut up because those are the true statistics, three percent …”
The bottom-line (at least for me) is that medical activity statistics are irrelevant regardless of whether the argument is either “for” or “against.” So I would say to you that by relying on the 3% number as you have in the statement above, you are falling into the same trap as BP is. (In my opinion) The abortion issue simply is not defined by numbers.
BP, to torture your metaphor, the healthcare industry standard method of counting is “by building.” That “by building” method of counting has been in place for 100% of the healthcare industry in the United States since the 1960’s. That counting uses Current Procedure Terminology (CPT) codes that were developed by the American Medical Association (AMA) in the 1960s, and continue to be maintained by the AMA to this day. The reason this method of counting was adopted and used was to have consistency in the description of health care services in electronic and financial transactions. CPT was adopted as the counting standard by Medicare and Medicaid over 40 years ago. In the decades since the 1960’s it has been universally adopted by private insurance carriers and managed care companies.
Why are you fighting the whole health care industry on this standardized activity reporting issue?
BP
“All just a play on words.”
Let me see if I have this right.
In your eyes, the repeated statements by the PP representatives that they are receiving compensation for services, time and space provided, including zero if all of the work were done by the Daleiden company is just “a play of words”. While all of the clipping, editing, rephrasing, twisting to the point of immediate correction of the misstatement by the PP representatives, as presented by the Daleiden group are the literal truth.
That is certainly an interesting interpretation. I remain in disagreement.