decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Scientific fraud is rife: it's time to stand up for good science | 241 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Scientific fraud is rife: it's time to stand up for good science
Authored by: artp on Friday, November 02 2012 @ 06:18 PM EDT
What to do?

Long ago, I heard from someone who was involved in the
original study of cholesterol at a local university that the
results of a study are determined by who is funding it. In
the case of cholesterol, the published results were as
expected. But we all know that if you can't get the results
you want, you keep trying until the results match what is
desired. Not a bad idea in the mechanical laboratory, but
potentially disastrous in the medical laboratory. After
all, anyone can see if a mechanical device doesn't work, but
how do you establish that a medical device doesn't work?

As an alternate remedy, I would suggest that instead of
penalizing researchers who are on the edge, ethically or
not, that perhaps the government should start funding more
of the needed research for health care -- and then keep its
fingers out of looking at the results. That would be the end
of pharmaceutical patents (Bayh-Dole notwithstanding). I do
not believe that pharma patents are needed, and I firmly
believe that the amounts of money involved are prone to
cause fraud and deceit. We still don't have proper drugs for
many modern plagues. Put research back in the university
setting, and free the researchers from satisfying the
investors.

---
Userfriendly on WGA server outage:
When you're chained to an oar you don't think you should go down when the galley
sinks ?

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )