"“Once a field commits to a particular hypothesis, the research resources — funding, experimental models, and training — all get in line,” she wrote in a 2018 a

"“Once a field commits to a particular hypothesis, the research resources — funding, experimental models, and training — all get in line,” she wrote in a 2018 analysis. That brings backers of the dominant idea accolades, awards, lucrative consulting deals, and well-paid academic appointments. Admitting doubt, let alone error, would be not only be a blow to the ego but also a threat to livelihood." Is this not extremely controversial? It was always my belief that "not creating a cure for X disease keeps the money flowing" was the calling card of tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy nuts. This statement, and the following paragraphs seem to suggest this is somewhat commonplace