Home | Community | Message Board

Please support our sponsors.

General Interest >> Political Discussion

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Jump to first unread post. Pages: 1

Registered: 05/10/02
Posts: 901
Loc: U.S.S.A.
Conflict of Interest the Other Way
    #3953014 - 03/22/05 12:33 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Conflict of Interest the Other Way
by Tibor R. Machan

A constant beef of critics of various regulatory panels is that their members have financial ties to industry. For example, a recent piece in The New York Times made much of the fact that the FDA panel that didn't demand that all anti-pain drugs be pulled off the market had 10 members who had "industry ties." Written by Gardiner Harris and Alex Berenson, in the February 25th issue of The Times, the article, "10 Voters on Panel Backing Pain Pills Had Industry Ties," lamented the fact that not all the members of the panel were completely independent of firms in the industry they were asked to oversee. It is typical of the pro-regulation media to keep insisting that anyone who has ever done any consulting for an industry must be biased in favor of that industry. While there can be some justified concern here, not unless there is evidence of bias is there warrant for indicting these people for any malfeasance.

Of course, the FDA or any other regulatory agency is going to appoint people to panels who know their stuff, and such people are bound to have had some connection with the industry they know. Drug firms, for example, need expert advice and they get such advice from university professors who will also likely to be asked by government to oversee the regulatory process. Does it follow necessarily that such people will blindly favor the interest of those in the industry that has hired them in the past? Of course not. But it is always tempting to impugn their integrity by such association. If they have worked for the industry, they must be biased. It doesn't, however, follow by a long shot.

Now what is interesting is that the same media that is jumping all over the people who have worked for various firms in a certain industry, claiming these people are basically corrupt, does not ever consider those in the academic world as being suspect of special interests. Yet, most people in the academy work for government. Even the most prestigious private universities, like Harvard or Princeton, get gobs of money from the feds, to do research, produce papers on this or that topic of "public interest," consult about public policy, etc. These folks are deeply beholden to government. It is virtually their bread and butter ? or at least their considerable extra pocket change. Without the government associations they would not be invited to innumerable conferences, asked to publish in various journals, contribute to encyclopedias, write text books, do peer reviews, sit on agency panels, and so forth.

In other words, the bulk of so-called independent scholars aren't independent at all ? they owe their soul to the company store, which is the government of the United States of America or, in many cases, their state governments. Yet few news organizations call these folks, with evident links to governments, to task for their conflict of interest. Why?

This is the governmental habit that a few people have managed to write about. Yet they have also managed to be ignored, to a large extent. Jonathan R. T. Hughes penned his book, Governmental Habit Redux: Economic Controls from Colonial Times to the Present(Princeton University Press, 1991), so as to call attention to this fact but, alas, grand media outlets like The New York Times pay scant attention to their message.

The fact is that innumerable professors throughout the most prestigious universities of this and many other countries are avid supporters of government regulations and supervision of the private sector, all of which require their very own professional "assistance." They write the scholarly studies that show the need for all this regulation and supervision. They supply the apologetics for the expansion of government control of the economy and all the professions, all the high-sounding rationales about equality, for abating of poverty, for reduction for injustice via government controls, involving the expansion of government's scope in our lives.

Yet where is the mainstream media pointing out this conflict of interest? Nowhere, that's where. One may, then, call into question all the moralistic concern with conflict of interest when it comes to associations between experts and the industry they are being asked to judge. After all, government is the biggest of all industries, yet those who judge it, nearly all of them recipients of government's largesse, do not get their integrity called into question by the same media that bellyaches about the alleged corruption in the private sector.

I say, clean your own house, major media, before you start pointing fingers.

"In religion and politics people's beliefs and convictions are in almost every case gotten at second-hand, and without examination."
-- Mark Twain

Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/01/05
Posts: 23,576
Loc: The Barricades
Re: Conflict of Interest the Other Way [Re: Autonomous]
    #3953076 - 03/22/05 12:55 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Son Of God
Registered: 02/19/04
Posts: 1,459
Last seen: 5 years, 8 months
Re: Conflict of Interest the Other Way [Re: Silversoul]
    #3953780 - 03/22/05 03:27 PM (13 years, 2 months ago)

Good post.

Government subsides to the higher education establishment are often said to benefit us all, especially the poor. In reality any subsidy to colleges benefit those tenured ivory tower elites on campuses, as well as those who attend college. The people who attend college are disproportionately drawn from the middle and upper economic classes. Subsidies to college in this effect are a tax on the poor to educate the rich.

For every poor lil negro that they make a poster child, you have a countless number of individuals who would be paying for college anyway with or without government intervention.

From Milton Friedman


The great scandal of our times, in my opinion, is government expenditure on higher schooling. There is no other program so perverse in its distributional effects. In the great state of California, which has one of the most extensive public higher education systems in the country, over 50 percent of the students at the colleges and universities come from the 25 percent of the families by income. Five percent come from the bottom 25 percent. When I want to be demagogic, I say that?s a system under which the people in Watts send to college the children from Beverly Hills.


Tastes just like chicken

Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Jump to top. Pages: 1

General Interest >> Political Discussion

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Russia says to defend post-war Iraq oil interests
( 1 2 all )
pattern 2,155 22 03/28/03 04:31 PM
by grib
* EPA Wording Found to Mirror Industry's DigitalDuality 379 0 09/24/04 02:37 AM
by DigitalDuality
* Conflict: Desert Storm Discordja 588 9 12/02/02 09:22 AM
by monoamine
* Affimative Action and the Univ. of Mich.
( 1 2 all )
Innvertigo 2,158 24 01/20/03 01:21 PM
by Dilauded
* US troops to 'protect oil interests' in Africa? Edame 561 1 07/11/03 02:55 PM
by Xlea321
* Interesting thought....
( 1 2 3 4 5 all )
RonoS 6,937 98 08/16/03 09:20 AM
by Phred
* Interesting (but long) article on electronic voting. luvdemshrooms 598 0 10/15/03 05:44 PM
by luvdemshrooms
* It is not in America?s interest to invade Iraq. RonoS 1,866 12 09/27/02 02:03 AM
by downforpot

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil
594 topic views. 0 members, 2 guests and 4 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Toggle Favorite | Print Topic | Stats ]
Search this thread:
Marijuana Demystified
Please support our sponsors.

Copyright 1997-2018 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.041 seconds spending 0.004 seconds on 19 queries.