Pitt will rename hall honoring former dean linked to syphilis experiments |

Pitt will rename hall honoring former dean linked to syphilis experiments

Keith Srakocic/AP
The Cathedral of Learning on the University of Pittsburgh campus in Oakland

The University of Pittsburgh Board of Trustees has voted to remove from a housing complex the name of a former dean tied to experiments that infected Guatemalans with syphilis and deceived African-American men who had the disease, Pitt announced Friday.

Dr. Thomas Parran Jr., after whom a Graduate School of Public Health building is named, was the nation’s surgeon general from 1936 to 1948. He helped found the School of Public Health and was its first dean from 1948 until 1958, according to a report from a committee Pitt created to review the hall’s name.

The infamous Tuskegee study, in which researchers monitored syphilis in African-American men while falsely telling the men they were treating the disease, ran from 1932 to 1972. From 1946 to 1948, American researchers exposed more than 1,300 Guatemalans, including prisoners and mental institution patients, to syphilis and other diseases without informed consent, according to the report.

The Board of Trustees named the hall in 1969, before information on the experiments became public.

The decision to remove Parran’s name from the hall follows recommendations from the committee and from Chancellor Patrick Gallagher. In addition to changing the name, Pitt will “design and implement new programs to address the complex legacy of Thomas Parran,” Graduate School of Public Health Dean Donald Burke said in a news release.

The school will remove markers and plaques with Parran’s name “in coming weeks,” according to the release. A new name hasn’t yet been decided.

Wes Venteicher is a Tribune-Review staff writer. Reach him at 412-380-5676, [email protected] or via Twitter @wesventeicher.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.