Display:
I'd say that's not reality based.

Even allowing for the fetishisation of the scientific paper process - which is hardly infallible - big pharma has a long history of distorting it for profit.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Sun Nov 8th, 2009 at 07:29:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]
If somebody wants to have a serious discussion of the failings of counting papers and citations as a measure of scientific production, then I'm game. It does have numerous and grave flaws, that makes it unsuitable as a serious indexing tool.

Fortunately, when all the anti-vaxers have is a bought and paid for "study" by Wakefield and a couple of conspiracy theories, you don't need a serious index to debunk it.

If you want to discuss the many and varied faults and crimes of Big Pharma, then I'm also game. But then I'd suggest that you look at the failure to do anything serious in the way of malaria research, the absolutely criminal crusade against generic drugs in developing countries, or the aggressive way over-the-counter drugs (and even a few prescription drugs) are being marketed as lifestyle accessories.

Vaccines are a no-show in that game: Low markup, comparatively low volume, adequate R&D, relatively unaggressively advertised and fairly widely available outside the first world.

- Jake

If you only spend 20 minutes of the rest of your life on economics, go spend them here.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Sun Nov 8th, 2009 at 12:45:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series