Science for Sale

Science is for sale. Environmental science is for sale. Pharmaceutical science is for sale. Sociology is for sale, and so is theology. Science has become a corporate—and government—weapon, and, increasingly, it is corporate America and the federal government, not academia or the scientific establishment, that are setting the terms of the scientific debate. These are terms accepted by the media that cover scientific developments that affect the medicines we take, the household chemicals we use, the pesticides we use on our lawns and in our apartments, and even the science curriculum taught in our schools. In fact, as Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., has pointed out, the head of the Forest Service was once a lobbyist for the timber industry. The man in charge of American public land was once a mining industry lobbyist. And Andy Card, until recently the President’s Chief of Staff, was General Motors’ chief counsel—and one of its best lobbyists. An overwhelming majority of top White House officials have ties to the energy industry.

Corporations and the corporate ethos have quietly invaded the realm of science, and the results are grim. And at no other point in time has there been more at stake—because science touches everyone. From the medicines we take to treat common skin conditions to the cereal we eat for breakfast, from the products we use to scrub our kitchen counters, the building materials we use to renovate our home, and the neighborhood dry cleaner we use to clean our clothes to content of our children’s textbooks—nearly everything we consume and surround ourselves with is dependent on science. And more and more, that science is overseen not by scientists, but by CEOs, government officials, and publicity firms.

Today, chemical company execs sit on USDA research boards of major universities. Pharmaceutical manufacturers lavish gifts and inducements on clinicians and doctors in the hopes they will prescribe their medicines and endorse their products in journal articles. In fact, in the last few years, cases of companies promoting drugs in the exam room have become more prevalent.

In 2002, unsealed court documents revealed that some physicians allowed drug reps into their own examining rooms to meet with patients, review medical histories—even charts—and make recommendations for prescription drugs—all in exchange for money. The prestigious New England Journal of Medicine published a roaring editorial bemoaning the pervasive financial ties between researchers and corporations—and copping to having published ostensibly independent reports that were later discovered to have been ghostwritten by employees of the companies making the drugs in question. The journal tightened up its rules for disclosure of corporate ties by review authors only to loosen those requirements three years later. It had, the journal’s editors explained, become impossible to find scientists with no corporate interest or connection to fill its pages. And just weeks ago, the Wall Street Journal reported that science journals are attempting to boost their Thompson Scientific ratings by manipulating the “impact factors” of the articles they publish. They do this by requiring contributors to cite in their work as many articles published by the journal as possible. This practice has led to widespread concern among scientists about the effect this will have on the integrity of scientific research.

This blog is about politics, profits, and the manipulation of science. Thanks for reading, and stay tuned.