3 ms·
Well in the name of freedom anyone can and should be able to do science. And anyone may legitimately come up with a cure. But seldom do we see that happen. Inst
by x5n1 11y ago
Well in the name of freedom anyone can and should be able to do science. And anyone may legitimately come up with a cure. But seldom do we see that happen. Instead we usually see incremental progress on existing knowledge, which is then used to do regulatory capture of some given drug. Do governments distort science less, well they don't partake in this sort of scientific charade as profit motivated corporations do. They also don't have any incentive to push drugs for massive profit that they know don't work that well or cause certain side-effects.
- ucaetano 11y agoBut politicians have massive other incentives: supporting their ideology, religious beliefs, power structures, etc. Between someone motivated purely by profit, and a politician, I trust the profit-driven person far more. Their intentions are completely clear unlike a politician's.
- x5n1 11y agoWhen it comes to supporting science they have only two choices, to fund it or not to fund it. So distortions would only come from them not funding something. The other stuff, I don't know how it applies to science funding. In case of not funding, I think there is enough spectrum of thought between liberals and conservatives to cover funding most causes if possible.
- ucaetano 11y agoNo, there's the decision of what to fund, and who to fund in each field. You could easily fund a group with anti-GMO views, or fund a group with pro-GMO views. It gets even trickier when you add global warming, abortion, mental health, etc. into the options.