this post was submitted on 20 Dec 2023
492 points (95.1% liked)

science

14726 readers
931 users here now

just science related topics. please contribute

note: clickbait sources/headlines aren't liked generally. I've posted crap sources and later deleted or edit to improve after complaints. whoops, sry

Rule 1) Be kind.

lemmy.world rules: https://mastodon.world/about

I don't screen everything, lrn2scroll

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

In trials

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] SCB@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago (2 children)

It’s not active suppression most of the time,

This is your initial claim, though.

[–] sigmaklimgrindset@sopuli.xyz 2 points 10 months ago

Also, apologies if I come off as aggressive at any point, I still have a lot of residual anger over what I experienced with my former career.

[–] sigmaklimgrindset@sopuli.xyz 1 points 10 months ago

No, my initial claim was:

Curing diabetes isn’t as profitable as selling insulin. That’s why it doesn’t get funded.

Then you opined that whoever comes up with a cure wins, which should be true in a perfect world. In fact, most researchers would agree with you.

Unfortunately, a lot of MBA’s in these pharma companies don’t see it that way, and my reply to you was trying to outline the realities of that. I focussed more on the patent-and-bury part because this is the one method less known to the public (and less used), but underfunding research that can do a public good but isn’t profitable is a common technique by corporations in research, regardless of the discipline.

My bad, I thought this was common knowledge, but it probably isn’t for people who aren’t in PhD/post-doc research roles.