tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22533421.post114485171078700655..comments2023-07-02T10:49:13.110-05:00Comments on shotgunfreude - bush & cheney versus america: Clinical trials by for-profit companies are unscientific by definitionShazam McShotgunsteinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06534263481174626345noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22533421.post-87608089295902875782006-09-20T18:53:00.000-05:002006-09-20T18:53:00.000-05:00I heartily agree with everything you say in your s...I heartily agree with everything you say in your second paragraph, el guapo, but I stand by this post. Everyone has preconceived notions, but my point was that this kind of research setting imposes a particular, systemic interpretive bias on its researchers.<br /><br />That is, the researchers depend for their livelihood on a company whose managers make quite clear that hundreds of millions of dollars, and perhaps the continuing existence of the company, may be gained or lost depending on how they interpret their data. Then, once having understood that, the researchers are supposed to clear their minds and gauge experimental results purely objectively.<br /><br />Any scientist who thinks that setting could not influence her capability to interpret data objectively, on some level, is almost certainly fooling herself.<br /><br />On the other hand, imagine a fantasy world with a nation that has an FDA that is not in the back pocket of the lobbyists for the entities it is supposed to regulate, and flying unicorns, and all that, where a company has to pay the FDA to go out and do the final clinical trials of a proposed pharmaceutical, and the scientists doing the clinical trials are employees of that public agency, answering to no one with the capability to make decisions on their income and future employment who also has a tremendous stake in the outcome of the trials.Shazam McShotgunsteinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06534263481174626345noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22533421.post-1144979891065377572006-04-13T20:58:00.000-05:002006-04-13T20:58:00.000-05:00You paint with a mighty broad brush and on the wro...You paint with a mighty broad brush and on the wrong barn. By your argument any scientific research would fall into the "cargo cult" category as every researcher would carry a preconceived opinion or hypothesis. <BR/><BR/>The important issue is not "who" is doing the research, it is "how". Note Feynman referred to diligently attempting to disprove, not going in with a blank mind. It is a willingness to be disproved and accept what the data say that define scientific debate.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com