Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

GMW: Bad Money and good science/Being a heretic's a particularly bad

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

GMW: Bad Money and good science/Being a heretic's a

particularly bad

" GM WATCH " <info

Sun, 29 May 2005 15:44:01 +0100

 

 

 

 

GM WATCH daily

http://www.gmwatch.org

------

1.Bad Money and good science

2.Article by Dr Milton Wainwright

 

excerpt: Being a heretic has been a particularly bad

idea during four historical periods: the Catholic

inquisition, the Lutheran Protestant period, the

Stalin-Lysenko years and finally the present day. (ITEM 2)

------

1.Bad Money and good science

Letters

Independent on Sunday, 29 May 2005

 

Your Inside Story " The Monsanto Report " ( 22 May) which highlighted the

treatment of Arpad Pusztai illustrates how scientists who come up with

controversial findings, are often subjected to immediate,

disproportionate attack by the

scientific establishment. The attack on Dr Pusztai (whose work

indicated potential dangers in GM food) was made with almost indecent

haste.

Some of these attacks were politically motivated or came from

scientists who relied on the GM industry for funding.

 

Like all research, Pusztai's work was open to criticism but the venom

of the attack showed that vested interest, rather than impartiality

was often

paramount.

 

If the public is to have confidence in science, we scientists must be

able to demonstrate our independence. Such independence will never be

guaranteed if scientists have to rely on funds from the food and

pharmaceutical industries to research sensitive subjects such as the

safety

of new drugs, vaccines and GM food.

 

Dr Milton Wainwright

Dept of Molecular Biology and Biotechnology

University of Sheffield

------

2.Article by Dr Milton Wainwright in 'Science & Public Affairs'

 

COMMENT

 

The article by Dr Wainwright in the journal Science & Public Affairs -

item 2 - was replied to by the Royal Society's Biological Secretary,

Patrick Bateson. In his response Bateson claimed that The Lancet

published Pusztai's research " in the face of objections by its

statistically-competent referees " .

 

In fact, this was a lie. Pusztai's Lancet paper successfully came

through a peer review process which was far more stringent than that

applying to most published papers.

 

As Dr Wainwright asks, " Is the scientific community going to continue

to sit idly by while its members are victimised in this way? "

 

Bateson's response can found here:

http://www.the-ba.net/NR/rdonlyres/F8F08F06-5C7D-4B93-94E4-F73A2EB309C7/0/June_2\

002.PDF

.......

Science & Public Affairs, June 2002

http://www.the-ba.net/NR/rdonlyres/F8F08F06-5C7D-4B93-94E4-F73A2EB309C7/0/June_2\

002.PDF

 

Some recent examples show that rocking the boat in modern science can

have dramatic effects on the career and even livelihoods of modern

scientists. Why do we allow fellow scientists to be treated in this

disgraceful fashion?

 

Our teachers are fond of telling us how religious bigots persecuted

scientists like Galileo and Copernicus. How much do they tell us about

how

science treats its own dissenters? Although being a scientific heretic

clearly carries with it a certain cache, anyone tempted to become a

paid-up member should expect to forfeit their reputations, careers and

possibly livelihoods.

 

The French immunologist, Jacques Bevensite, is the perfect modern

heretic who, before conducting some fateful experiments, was a respected

scientist with a good track record of funding and high profile

publications. He observed that certain biologically active substances

still

exhibit an effect even when diluted in water (with shaking) to a point

where

they no longer exist (the so-called 'Memory of Water'). He submitted a

paper to Nature, which after due process was published. When the

homeopaths said that this work proved their case, the scientific

community

went ballistic!

 

Under pressure, mainly from the American scientific establishment, John

Maddox, the then Editor of Nature, distanced himself from the paper,

and sent in a posse of ghost busters to sort out Benveniste. The French

scientist became a national embarrassment. It was even suggested he had

been set up by the perfidious Anglo-Americans to discredit the glories

of French Science. He was eased out of his position as a French

Government scientist.

 

Now I have met Benveniste and observed

experiments conducted in his laboratory. He is a

first rate scientist, a perfectionist who goes to

incredible extremes to do good science. The fact

that his wayward work has been independently

reproduced remains a major embarrassment to

his critics.

 

What are heretics like? The most obvious characteristic of those I have

met is an almost

naive belief in the scientific method. Rather than being bitter, overly

argumentative people, they often turn out to be remarkably

goodhumoured.

 

How then does the scientific community deal

with its heretics? Mad, deranged, suspect, are all

words that are freely bandied about, often by those who know nothing

about what they are

casually debunking. It goes without saying that

the peer review and grant funding systems actively work against

dissent.

 

Another trick is to deny heretics a platform, making it inevitable that

they will turn to the media to put across their case. When, for

example, Dr Andrew Wakefield recently went public on his observations

that MMR

vaccine might be linked to autism he was admonished for not spending

ten years or so researching the full story. This despite the fact that

many respected scientific agencies, like NASA, go public at the drop of a

hat, while cancer

research charities love to pump out press releases concerning their

latest 'breakthroughs'. Dr Wakefield and other heretics must, it seems,

play by other rules.

 

Although I have restricted my discussion to heretics in my own field of

biology, all the sciences have their dissenters. In cosmology for

example, there are those who put the quasi state universe above the big

bang. Some physicists still believe in cold fusion, while a minority of

geologists doubt continental drift – itself a former heresy.

 

Surprisingly, organisations like the Royal Society and the Royal

Colleges often do the opposite of protecting heretics.The Royal

Society for

example, seemed to take an almost morbid delight in crucifying Árpád

Pusztai when he dared to doubt the safety of GM foods; a process

applauded

by those of his fellow scientists, whose grant income relied upon his

martyrdom.

 

Being a heretic has been a particularly bad

idea during four historical periods: the Catholic

inquisition, the Lutheran Protestant period, the

Stalin-Lysenko years and finally the present day.

Nowadays, university science in the UK is

'accountancy led' – a process exacerbated by the

recent Research Assessment Exercise (RAE).This

has proved to be a Stalinist exercise in the

bureaucratic centralisation of science.

 

Every aspect of the RAE works against dissenters. To excel in the RAE,

a researcher must obtain large amounts of grant income via peer review

and publish widely cited work (i.e. believable to the majority) in

so-called 'quality journals' (which are generally conservative in

outlook).

Finally, the researcher must attain high levels of esteem, including

being invited to speak at international (i.e. mainstream) meetings, and

being offered honours such as Fellowships of (usually conservative)

organisations like the Royal Society.

[out of interest, Pusztai had a large number of publications in

'quality journals', had spoken regularly at international meetings,

and was a

Fellow of the Royal Society of Edinburgh]

 

Is the scientific community going to continue to sit idly by while its

members are victimised in this way? Never forget that the next 'knock

on the door' could be for you!

 

Dr Milton Wainwright

is a Microbiologist at the University of Sheffield.

 

He has published widely on the history and philosophy of science.

m.wainwright

 

 

 

 

--------------------

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...