U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-26-2008, 07:17 AM
 
Location: Unperson Everyman Land
30,443 posts, read 20,094,730 times
Reputation: 8372

Advertisements

Once again palin is ahead of the curve.

I've seen two threads so far attacking Palin on the fruit fly issue. Public funding of open ended research is, and always has been, a black hole for our tax dollars. The claims these researchers make about the research they are performing is usually fanciful at best. The request for cash will always have some current health issue attached to it like breast cancer, Lupus, HIV/AIDS or Autism. It's a good ploy. If lawmakers oppose the grants, they oppose research on HIV/AIDS or Autism. One never hears these people state that the research they would like to have funded will have some entirely commercial application like growing hair or giving old guys woodies. Now we are to fund a study of the reproductive cycle of fruit flies, OK. But prove that the study has merit before my tax dollars are dumped into it. If all we are really doing is creating commercial products that control fruit flies, let the restaurant and bar industry pay for the research. I would like to see accountability before my money is spent. How about you?

Please keep to the original subject. Their are probably twenty other threads available for Bush bashing. Please not here.


"We employ a passive, post-hoc justification for our activities to compensate for the lack of a valid system of performance metrics. We take a narrow view of our responsibility to society in the transformations that we cause. We have no foresight or planning operation in place that would tell us how to define, measure, or achieve greater success."

Past and Prologue: Why I Am Optimistic About the Future


"No group of humans is completely honest: dishonest window-cleaners steal DVD-players; dishonest scientists invent data. Both—if not caught—profit from their dishonesty. There is no question that we need mechanisms for making dishonest research less likely and for investigating cases that arise, but how much, at what stage, and who should do it?"

The policing of science

"My main concern is not that some doctors and some researchers are dishonest, because in any profession there will be some dishonest people. My main concern is that within the medical profession there is a failure to deal with the misconduct and that is illustrated in the examples I will present."

http://www.medico-legalsociety.org.u...l_research.pdf
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-26-2008, 07:23 AM
 
3,255 posts, read 4,582,883 times
Reputation: 546
Pure science is the stuff of miracles and must be continued. I have a friend whose daughter is working on a project that was called nonsense and is now bearing fruit. She is engineering microscopic robot like cancer detector/destroyers. It is incredible technology/science and it comes against common sense, common sense is limiting in discovery, so I am for broadening, not limiting our scientific research where we can.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-26-2008, 07:33 AM
 
Location: In the sunshine on a ship with a plank
3,413 posts, read 7,997,451 times
Reputation: 2219
So because Palin doesn't understand science and the vast effects it can have on our world, we should "repudiate" science?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-26-2008, 07:38 AM
 
Location: Unperson Everyman Land
30,443 posts, read 20,094,730 times
Reputation: 8372
Quote:
Originally Posted by janeannwho View Post
Pure science is the stuff of miracles and must be continued. I have a friend whose daughter is working on a project that was called nonsense and is now bearing fruit. She is engineering microscopic robot like cancer detector/destroyers. It is incredible technology/science and it comes against common sense, common sense is limiting in discovery, so I am for broadening, not limiting our scientific research where we can.





I'm sure your friend's daughter is very bright.


The question was about accountability.


What fruit is it specifically bearing?


When will the human studies begin?


Everyone doing publicly funded research will make the same claims about their research. Why is this different?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-26-2008, 07:39 AM
 
3,255 posts, read 4,582,883 times
Reputation: 546
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey View Post
Once again palin is ahead of the curve.

lawmakers oppose the grants, they oppose research on HIV/AIDS or Autism. One never hears these people state that the research they would like to have funded will have some entirely commercial application like growing hair or giving old guys woodies. Now we are to fund a study of the reproductive cycle of fruit flies, OK. But prove that the study has merit before my tax dollars are dumped into it. If all we are really doing is creating commercial products that control fruit flies, let the restaurant and bar industry pay for the research. I would like to see accountability before my money is spent. How about you?
No one tried to come up with a drug to grow hair. That drug is a biproduct of research on blood pressure medication. Back in the day, my dad was supposed to have an operation to widen an artery, but it was risky and I was still a kid and my mom was dead, so he chose to enter into an experimental drug trial instead, to try to work out the blood pressure problems he had his whole life. He had lost his hair fairly young and at the age of 50 he started growing his hair back and we teased him, but it was just the combination of blood pressure meds. About ten years later, Rogaine came out and he was still around to see it because he had taken the blood pressure meds. So what you see as nonsensical, was life saving research.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-26-2008, 07:41 AM
 
Location: Unperson Everyman Land
30,443 posts, read 20,094,730 times
Reputation: 8372
Quote:
Originally Posted by pirate girl View Post
So because Palin doesn't understand science and the vast effects it can have on our world, we should "repudiate" science?
Bla, bla, bla.....did you bother to read the articles?

Do you remember the question I asked?

Do you believe everything you hear?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-26-2008, 07:44 AM
 
3,255 posts, read 4,582,883 times
Reputation: 546
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey View Post
I'm sure your friend's daughter is very bright.


The question was about accountability.


What fruit is it specifically bearing?


When will the human studies begin?


Everyone doing publicly funded research will make the same claims about their research. Why is this different?
The research is being conducted on humans, however, the US will not be able to profit, because she is being funded by an EU consortium because we did not have the money. They have started working on brain cancers because they are often not operable, etc. But the point is that 20 years ago, someone had to do that pure science to get to the stage where they can apply. It is not soundbite science. I just always think of what the transistor did and that took thousands of years of scientific thinking to get to.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-26-2008, 07:49 AM
 
Location: Unperson Everyman Land
30,443 posts, read 20,094,730 times
Reputation: 8372
Quote:
Originally Posted by janeannwho View Post
No one tried to come up with a drug to grow hair. That drug is a biproduct of research on blood pressure medication. Back in the day, my dad was supposed to have an operation to widen an artery, but it was risky and I was still a kid and my mom was dead, so he chose to enter into an experimental drug trial instead, to try to work out the blood pressure problems he had his whole life. He had lost his hair fairly young and at the age of 50 he started growing his hair back and we teased him, but it was just the combination of blood pressure meds. About ten years later, Rogaine came out and he was still around to see it because he had taken the blood pressure meds. So what you see as nonsensical, was life saving research.
If a legitimate medical innovation grows hair or give old guys woodies, I say great! That is as long as some sort of accountability is in play. Everyone doing publicly funded research says the same things. It could cure AIDS! What is different about the fruit fly study?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-26-2008, 07:52 AM
 
Location: Unperson Everyman Land
30,443 posts, read 20,094,730 times
Reputation: 8372
Quote:
Originally Posted by janeannwho View Post
The research is being conducted on humans, however, the US will not be able to profit, because she is being funded by an EU consortium because we did not have the money. They have started working on brain cancers because they are often not operable, etc. But the point is that 20 years ago, someone had to do that pure science to get to the stage where they can apply. It is not soundbite science. I just always think of what the transistor did and that took thousands of years of scientific thinking to get to.

Any links you could provide me?

Articles?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-26-2008, 07:58 AM
 
3,255 posts, read 4,582,883 times
Reputation: 546
Think of it as a building process. Someone had to learn how to study cells once they realized they existed. Big deal, we can look at cells under a microscope, but that took a long time to get to. Then they started just looking at the cell and identifying stuff, no real "product", then studied how the cell works, no real product, then how the whole cell reacted to this or that stimuli or solution, some medical products there (intravenous etc), then how the parts of the cell works together, etc. and so on, until now they can get all the way down to the building blocks of the cell and can you imagine all the permutations of things that can be learned now? So each study adds to the body of knowledge, that maybe your daughter or grandson will use to create a therapy for schizophrenia. but you have to get all the parts. It cannot be discounted. Your product is knowledge.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top