It is also due to how the science industry works. Scientific
research is expensive to conduct; not in terms of scientist’s wages (which are
relatively low) but in terms of very high reagent and equipment costs. The
strange payoff for the many hours in the lab and the billions of pounds spent
is the prestige and glory of getting your work published in a “good” journal
(i.e. well referenced by other scientists). The editors of such journals have
immense power in science; their decision to publish can make or break the
career of a scientist. This is because the next round of funding to pay for
research is dependent on reputation, which is mainly founded on the number of
“good” papers a scientist has.
In the scramble for publications and the competition for
limited funding, the sufferer can become a vague presence. No doubt the
intentions of the scientist are founded on advancing knowledge to alleviate suffering.
Research is hard, precarious work; a scientist also has to be lucky. But the
day to day business of research is engaged in generating papers to justify the
next round of funding. It is an open question how compatible the intention and
actual business of science is.
Sufferers want the “coal” produced by research to stoke
their fires of hope while researchers are busy at the dark coalface. It is
important for the two to meet. Sufferers should engage with research and hold
researchers to account. Researchers should keep in mind that their work
describes the suffering of real people.
No comments:
Post a Comment