4 ms·

Hi folks - below is an article I read recently which opened my eyes to the risks of corporate funded research. Companies have long funded research to back their

Hi folks - below is an article I read recently which opened my eyes to the risks of corporate funded research. Companies have long funded research to back their interests that can have serious ramifications on public safety and use of public resources. Long read but enjoyable and informative. [1]: The Most Important Scientist You've Never Heard Of: http://mentalfloss.com/article/94569/clair-patterson-scientist-who-determined-age-earth-and-then-saved-it http://mentalfloss.com/article/94569/clair-patterson-scienti...

ucaetano 9y ago
Well, that is the alternative? Forbidding privately-funded research? Submitting it to gigantic bureaucratic committees? The only proposal I back is forcing publicly-funded researchers to disclose all gifts and grants, similarly to public officials, but even that is a massive bureaucratic ordeal. Research is not a regulated environment, and it should not be one.
- amoorthy 9y ago
  I think the suggestion is simple: Disclose funding sources and % of funding total for any research. And if you don't disclose then no journal should accept your paper. Funding source does not by itself invalidate findings and corporations absolutely should continue to fund research. But for readers of research this is critical information. I may be naive but this does not seem like a big bureaucratic ask. And even if it were seems like good scientists would do it because they pride themselves on pursuing the truth with impeccable attention to detail.
  - ucaetano 9y ago
    That is a fair suggestion, but the devil is in the details: how do you implement that? How do you prevent journals from accepting? How do you force researchers to disclose?
    - amoorthy 9y ago
      Journals that accept papers that don't disclose funding sources progressively lose their credibility. (I am not a scientist and have never published a paper so I may be asking for things here that are unreasonable but they seem plausible and useful to me).
thinkfurther 9y ago
Thank you for posting that. Looking for a source for one of the quotes, I found this: https://www.scribd.com/doc/139421699/oh-patterson https://www.scribd.com/doc/139421699/oh-patterson (here's the bit I was looking for) > Look, I’m stupid, all right? I’m not some brilliant person. I’m a little child. You know the emperor’s new clothes? I can see the naked emperor, just because I’m a little child-minded person. I’m not smart. I mean, good scientists are like that. They have the minds of children, to see through all this façade of all this other stuff that they know is stupid nonsense. They just don’t see it the way other people see it. I for one indeed have never heard to of him before, and I'll have to learn more; and that on top of the article and the subject matter of it being vitally important! Thanks again.

ucaetano 9y ago

Well, that is the alternative? Forbidding privately-funded research? Submitting it to gigantic bureaucratic committees? The only proposal I back is forcing publicly-funded researchers to disclose all gifts and grants, similarly to public officials, but even that is a massive bureaucratic ordeal. Research is not a regulated environment, and it should not be one.

amoorthy 9y ago
I think the suggestion is simple: Disclose funding sources and % of funding total for any research. And if you don't disclose then no journal should accept your paper. Funding source does not by itself invalidate findings and corporations absolutely should continue to fund research. But for readers of research this is critical information. I may be naive but this does not seem like a big bureaucratic ask. And even if it were seems like good scientists would do it because they pride themselves on pursuing the truth with impeccable attention to detail.
- ucaetano 9y ago
  That is a fair suggestion, but the devil is in the details: how do you implement that? How do you prevent journals from accepting? How do you force researchers to disclose?
  - amoorthy 9y ago
    Journals that accept papers that don't disclose funding sources progressively lose their credibility. (I am not a scientist and have never published a paper so I may be asking for things here that are unreasonable but they seem plausible and useful to me).

thinkfurther 9y ago

Thank you for posting that. Looking for a source for one of the quotes, I found this: https://www.scribd.com/doc/139421699/oh-patterson https://www.scribd.com/doc/139421699/oh-patterson (here's the bit I was looking for) > Look, I’m stupid, all right? I’m not some brilliant person. I’m a little child. You know the emperor’s new clothes? I can see the naked emperor, just because I’m a little child-minded person. I’m not smart. I mean, good scientists are like that. They have the minds of children, to see through all this façade of all this other stuff that they know is stupid nonsense. They just don’t see it the way other people see it. I for one indeed have never heard to of him before, and I'll have to learn more; and that on top of the article and the subject matter of it being vitally important! Thanks again.