[Toshi]

http://www.wired.com/news/medtech/0,1286,62119,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_1

A White House Office of Management and Budget, or OMB, bulletin (PDF) drafted in August 2003 would allow the government to hand-pick scientists to second-guess scientific research, opponents say. [...]

"This is explicitly taking control over when the public health and environmental agencies can make an announcement to the public," DePalma said. "You would have to go through peer review before disseminating that information to the public unless peer review is waived."

yet another reason why GWB should be voted out of office.

 

[$tinkle]

Originally posted by Toshi
would allow the government to hand-pick scientists to second-guess scientific research, opponents say.

sure, the opponents say that, but this is a claim which is anything but damning. Upon reading all 15 pages of the article (which is more than i can say for anyone who thinks the gov't is hand-picking scientists), i found that the desperate dems are hoping you'll just swallow this bush-hating felafel chub like jenna jamison

Originally posted by Toshi
yet another reason why GWB should be voted out of office.

indeed
this is right up there with the benefits for undocumented workers (that we'll be paying for), colonization of the middle east, and corporate scandals.

 

[Toshi]

Originally posted by $tinkle

this is right up there with the benefits for undocumented workers (that we'll be paying for), colonization of the middle east, and corporate scandals.

actually, to me, it is. why? politics when "justified" by science, no matter how shady and manipulated, is more powerful in the eyes of the unwashed masses.

 

[urban_rider]

next time you think that all scientists are right and never need to be checked take a step back and look around. I hope you dont take there advice from 200 years ago and bleed yourself next time you get sick

 

[Toshi]

Originally posted by urban_rider
next time you think that all scientists are right and never need to be checked take a step back and look around. I hope you dont take there advice from 200 years ago and bleed yourself next time you get sick

unwittingly you have proved my point. science is so powerful because it is malleable, because it changes over time. how do these changes happen? peer review certainly helps to weed out the junk. why this policy of gwb's administration is wrong is because it would mandate peer review by people _outside the field_ in question, in other words, gwb's cronies.

 

[urban_rider]

unfortunately not all of the republican party is evil and some administrated appointed officials are actually doing a decient job even if the bush bashers dont get it

 

[ohio]

Originally posted by urban_rider
unfortunately not all of the republican party is evil and some administrated appointed officials are actually doing a decient job even if the bush bashers dont get it

they might be nice guys with the best intentions. but what business is it of theirs to regulate the dissemination of information? Science proves and disproves itself over time. It's self-regulating. I thougt only the democrats added pointless bureaucracy?

 

[urban_rider]

the point of this is not to limit scientific rethinking bt to incurage it. The government has a responcibility to make sure the public is kept safe

 

[$tinkle]

Originally posted by urban_rider
next time you think that all scientists are right and never need to be checked take a step back and look around. I hope you dont take there advice from 200 years ago and bleed yourself next time you get sick

every month, my wife gets mentally ill for a day or two, then bleeds, then she's all better.
does that count?

 

[$tinkle]

Originally posted by Toshi
unwittingly you have proved my point. science is so powerful because it is malleable, because it changes over time. how do these changes happen? peer review certainly helps to weed out the junk. why this policy of gwb's administration is wrong is because it would mandate peer review by people _outside the field_ in question, in other words, gwb's cronies.

i think i can go ahead & predict both how policy will be made in the name of science (sometimes rightfully so), and how certain fights will be anticipated.

enter abortion...

 

[Toshi]

a new article on this topic:

http://www.wired.com/news/medtech/0,1286,62339,00.html

The Bush administration has distorted scientific fact leading to policy decisions on the environment, health, biomedical research and nuclear weaponry, a group of about 60 scientists, including 20 Nobel laureates, said in a statement on Wednesday.

or read the same thing on the nytimes

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/18/science/18CND-RESE.html?ex=1077771600&en=fe9176d8d470477b&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE