X-Message-Number: 5103
From:  (Thomas Donaldson)
Subject: Re: CryoNet #5101 - #5102
Date: Sat, 4 Nov 1995 10:24:08 -0800 (PST)

Hi!

About having government do research, medical or other:

1. There ARE ways in which individuals can have their individual say in what
   medical treatments etc they receive. These require, of course, something
   like one or more bodies (nongovernmental) which check on these new 
   developments and report their opinion to subscribers or the public at 
   large. More than one such body, of course, will help filter out any 
   biases held by only one. 

   We have an example in the organization which publishes Consumer Reports,
   which tests products to see how well they perform. I will say, though,
   that that particular organization has been VERY shy of doing such a thing
   as reporting on vitamin or drug preparations --- they've followed the
   FDA line completely. But that doesn't exclude the existence of another
   organization doing exactly that.

   As for such problems as intergenerational issues, or cases in which one
   side (the recipients of a treatment) cannot even speak for themselves,
   I do not know ANY method, governmental or not, which could really be
   said to solve that problem --- though governmental bureaus will of course
   loudly claim that they have solved it. But how are we to know what someone
   who is now unborn, and may never be born, would have chosen? Is the 
   government able to poll such people for their opinions while we are not?

2. Democracy in science is a far more slippery subject than Dr. Stodolsky's
   posting suggests. Here is a simple analogy: scientists are our eyes and 
   ears and nose. All three organs can be depended upon to sometimes tell us
   things which are very unpleasant and which we would prefer not to learn
   about. HOWEVER, if we insist on being ignorant about these things, we
   may find ourselves in far worse trouble than if we had been willing to
   keep our eyes open, ears and nose ready.

   We know, of course, that governmental science budgets are affected by all
   kinds of pressures: lobbyists, religious groups, business groups, etc etc.
   I cannot really claim that the present situation is better than one in 
   which we also had citizen's boards passing judgement on particular 
   research projects. It's just different. And over the last 30 years the
   US government has found itself a major supporter of research. 

   We might get better use out of our "eyes, ears, and nose" if the government
   (as a single entity) supported no research directly at all. Instead we
   might have a wide variety of funding agencies which would collect the money
   which now goes into taxes and spend it on whatever research their members
   and/or supporters want. (If you are really concerned by the ozone problem,
   what keeps you from giving donations to PRIVATE agencies which do 
   research on it? --- and incidentally, I personally think that both CO2 and
   ozone are problems which definitely need attention). The problem with 
   any single group or agency supporting most research is that the biases, one
   way or another, will express themselves in the research supported. 

   And those biases extend even into such things as physics. Right now, the 
   major money for research into fusion power goes into very large tokamak
   style reactors. At the same time, if you go looking through the physics
   literature, you will find a multitude of proposals for fusion reactors of 
   all sizes and shapes. Of course, if the only reactors possible are the large
   ones, that will tend to buttress any large organization which ultimately
   claims to run them --- as for instance, a government. I will not discuss
   here the biases in research on genetics or biology, some of which should
   be well known. 
  
   And naturally, I doubt very much that we will see any government-supported
   research into cryonics or antiaging treatments until both movements have
   essentially won their point to a majority ... not something which will 
   easily happen without scientific research into both. If you see that as 
   a chicken and egg problem, then you are forgetting that research need not
   be funded by any government.

			Best wishes, and long long life,

				Thomas Donaldson


Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=5103