View Single Post
  #5   ^
Old Tue, Jan-07-20, 08:07
tess9132 tess9132 is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 873
 
Plan: general lc
Stats: 214/146/130 Female 5'4"
BF:
Progress: 81%
Default

Quote:
I believe science interpretation as a part of public policy IS the job of government.
The problem, as I see it, is that there's too much money involved. Too many politicians and scientists have too much at stake. Look at how corrupt our politicians (on both sides of the aisle) are today. The more power we give the government, the more room there is for corruption. Wheat and corn farmers give so much money to politicians via re-election campaigns and seats to family members on their boards. I saw a meme that showed some politician decrying corruption. Her congressional salary is 174k and she's been in Congress for years. She's worth millions. Why? Because her family can get on boards of companies and win government contracts that will pay them millions. And these people get to write policy. The corruption and quid pro quo throughout every layer of our government is appalling.

I'll agree though that it would be wonderful to have a neutral arbiter who could sift through studies, but I just don't believe such an animal exists. It would be nice if we could trust the medical community, but they also have their livelihoods and standard of living at stake.
Reply With Quote