SoylentNews

Phoenix666 [soylentnews.org] writes:

A soda company sponsoring nutrition research [nytimes.com]. An oil conglomerate helping fund a climate-related research meeting [insideclimatenews.org]. Does the public care who's paying for science?

In a word, yes. When industry funds science, credibility suffers. And this does not bode well for the types of public-private research [phys.org] partnerships that appear to be becoming more prevalent [rdmag.com] as government funding for research and development lags [nsf.gov].

The recurring topic of conflict of interest has made headlines in recent weeks. The National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine has revised its conflict of interest guidelines [the-scientist.com] following questions about whether members [doi.org] of a recent expert panel on GMOs had industry ties or other financial conflicts that were not disclosed in the panel's final report.

Our own recent research [doi.org] speaks to how hard it may be for the public to see research as useful when produced with an industry partner, even when that company is just one of several collaborators.

The study [phys.org] found that participants distrusted any research coming from companies, even when produced by a diverse array of companies or in partnership with the government or non-corporate parties. Is this a real threat to science, as government funding of research declines?

Original Submission