I wonder if it goes beyond the things people have said thus far. Generally, people who go into environmental fields recognize they are going to make modest salaries. Conversely, people who end up in clinical research often start out heading for medical school and certainly there is an expectation that you will make big bucks in that field. I suspect that a certain percent of those going after MDs do so almost entirely for the money. Most people going into environment are hoping they will live comfortably. Certainly, there is a better chance that someone entering a clinical setting for selfish reasons is more likely to pursue selfish outcomes such as inventing data. Certainly, there are plenty of selfish people in all fields, but I see a lot of students entering clinical fields for the money. I can't recall ever seeing a student entering an environmental field for the money.
Surely, this post will tick some people off, but I can't help but wonder if there is not a connection here. Hopefully, I'll be enlightened by some wise folks on here and be wrong! :) On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 8:49 PM, Shiyun Wen<[email protected]> wrote: > Perhaps, it is more likely to be discovered when one falsifies in clinical > sciences than one does in Ecology / Evolution. Clinical research may get more > attention due to the amount of money involved and its practical usefulness. > Besides, it is impractical to ask an Ecologist to reproduce his / her work. > > Shiyun Wen, Ph. D > University of Puerto Rico > > > > ----- Original Message ---- > From: Isabella Capellini <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Tuesday, September 8, 2009 4:05:15 AM > Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] falsifying results in clinical research, why so > common? > >> Why, do we continue to see this >> ticker tape of falsified studies >> coming out of the clinical sciences? >> The last ecological/evolution study I recall like this was >> Piltdown Man! >> If it is "just human nature" why do we see so few in >> ecology and evolution? >> I thought this might be a good talking point! :) >> >> Looking forward to the discussion! >> > > Hello > > perhaps because there is a lot of money behind clinical studies? > pharmaceuticals care more of their earning than anything else I suspect. > > Best > Isabella > > -- > Isabella Capellini, PhD > Research Associate > > Evolutionary Anthropology Research Group > Department of Anthropology > Durham University > Dawson Building > South Road, Durham > DH1 3LE (U.K.) > > phone: +44 (0)191 3343298 > fax: +44 (0)191 3341618 > > http://www.dur.ac.uk/isabella.capellini/ > http://www.dur.ac.uk/anthropology/staff/profiles/?id=2366 > > http://www.bu.edu/phylogeny/index.html > > > > -- Malcolm L. McCallum Associate Professor of Biology Managing Editor, Herpetological Conservation and Biology Texas A&M University-Texarkana Fall Teaching Schedule: Vertebrate Biology - TR 10-11:40; General Ecology - MW 1-2:40pm; Forensic Science - W 6-9:40pm Office Hourse- TBA 1880's: "There's lots of good fish in the sea" W.S. Gilbert 1990's: Many fish stocks depleted due to overfishing, habitat loss, and pollution. 2000: Marine reserves, ecosystem restoration, and pollution reduction MAY help restore populations. 2022: Soylent Green is People! Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
