What would they win? :) Ok it isn't my main area but Bill's point is well taken. I suppose I'd be guilty too if you count a few free books or those stupid little foam objects they hand out or an occasional paid review or grant evaluation. Bill's point, as I see it, btw, is that it is more a matter of how much we are corrupted by their influence. Certainly even if you find someone who has never taken a rubber brain or paperweight or clock, or reviewed a book, or worked on one or more of their projects, or received support in grad school on a grant (oh my gosh- I'm more corrupt than I thought!), we've all be influenced by some of their publications etc. It would be silly to think that any of us are truly not touched by their long arms. But that doesn't necessarily mean we have bought into their story, don't criticially evaluate their claims or even recognize the benefits of NOT getting into the drug stream because often non-drug treatments are just as good or better and have very few (sic) side effects. Tim S.
Bill--
The real challenge would be to find a pharmacologist (psych or otherwise) who
has not (at least indirectly) received some form of support from the big pharm.
--
* PAUL K. BRANDON [EMAIL PROTECTED] *
* Psychology Dept Minnesota State University *
* 23 Armstrong Hall, Mankato, MN 56001 ph 507-389-6217 *
* http://www.mnsu.edu/dept/psych/welcome.html *
---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<<winmail.dat>>
--- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
