سؤال قراءة ستيب محلول — فهم التفاصيل (تدريب 5097)

(1) A soda company sponsoring nutrition research. An oil company helping fund a climate-related research meeting. Does the public care who's paying for science? (2) In a word, yes. When industry funds science, credibility suffers. And this does not bode well for the types of public-private research partnerships that appear to be becoming more common as government funding for research and development reduces. (3) 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 following questions about whether members of a recent expert group on GMO's had industry connections or other financial conflicts were not disclosed in the panel's final report. (4) This indicates 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. What people think of funding sources. (5) When a research team included an industry partner, the public were generally less likely to think the scientists would consider a full range of evidence and listen to different voices. An industry partner also reduced how much participants believed any resulting data would provide meaningful guidance for making decisions. (6) You may think that including a diverse array of partners in a research collaboration might remove the negative perceptions that come with industry involvement. But, while including scientists from a non-industry organization Particularly a nongovernmental organization) made some difference, the effect was small. Adding a government partner provided no real additional benefit. (7) Participants who were asked to describe what they thought about the research partnership in their own words said they were skeptical whether an industry partner could ever be trusted to release information that might hurt its profits. (8) Stories of Pharmaceutical companies conducting less than rigorous clinical trials for the benefit of their marketing departments, or the tobacco industry steadfastly denying the connection between smoking and cancer in the face of mounting evidence, help explain public concern about industry-funded science.