It's a mess. It follows on from the older debate about the independence of science in Universities (in the UK at least) when public funding was cut and investment by private companies encouraged. The lack of public science led people to ask where the balance was, who was looking at the effects of the products produced by the research, when the Universities were unlikely to question their funders.
In a judicial setting you can now find expert witnesses to contradict almost any expert witness you call. There is no recognised authority advising the judiciary on an independant basis. So while our R&d is focused on markets and new products, clearing up the mess is barely funded. The same principal will apply when judges start to dictate the socially acceptable face of science.
12 Oct 2005, 10:53 pm
