This sounds like an interesting book as to how science has become so politicized over the years that it isn't about 'finding truth' anymore, but about obtaining and sustaining government grant money amongst scientists.
[...science has become so politicized over the years that it isn't about 'finding truth' anymore, but about obtaining and sustaining government grant money amongst scientists.]
This is something of a distortion. There have always been scientists who reached biased conclusions based on pleasing their benefactors and there always will be. It is no worse now than it has been in the past.
Haven't read the thread yet, so perhaps someone has mentioned it ... but "State of Fear" by Michael Crichton factually illustrates this on the environmental side of the picture. The book is a real eye-opener, especially as it's scrupulously footnoted and sourced.
this can also apply to funding for research:
A Porsche 911 for AIDS, a 10 speed for Prostate Cancer
According to a chart from the National Institute of Health (which can be viewed in its entirety here), the NIH will spend an estimated $3.6 billion on AIDS related research for the current fiscal year, rising to $4 billion in FY 2003. In comparison the NIH will spend $360 million on prostate cancer this year, rising to $400 million in FY 2003.
According to the Centers for Disease Control, 31,000 men died of prostate cancer in 2000, and every year 2.3 million men are diagnosed with the disease. In contrast, 14,802 people died of AIDS in 1999 while only 45,000 were diagnosed with the disease that year. If we use the money figures for FY 2002 and the number of new diagnoses just mentioned we find that the NIH spends $157 on each new prostate cancer diagnosis versus $80,000 on each new AIDS diagnosis. Or let's put it another way. Divide the money by the deaths and the US government spends $243,210 trying (and failing) to prevent each AIDS death - while only spending $11,613 attempting to save the life of a man who dies from prostate cancer. Sources: CDC: Table 53. Acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) cases, according to age at diagnosis, sex, detailed race, and Hispanic origin: United States, selected years 1985-2000. HIV Fastfacts. Prostate Disease Fastfacts. Gary S. Becker of The Hoover Institute pointed out in an article appearing in the April 19, 1999 issue of Businessweek: "Research on AIDS has been much more generously funded by the federal government during the past decade than has research on breast and prostate cancer and other diseases that kill many more people."
One could in fact argue that the federal government is caving in to intimidation at the expense of research in diseases that affect more people yet lack the theatrical antics of a misguided yet trendy advocacy group. It's unfortunate given the fact that every man - straight or gay, monogamous or polyamorous will eventually face prostate cancer should he be lucky to live long enough. A man can avoid catching AIDS. He can't avoid prostate cancer.
Unfortunately, if anyone's abusing science here, it's Bethell himself, and he's making us all look bad in doing so. In addition to being a tireless advocate for Intelligent Design, he has advocated such spurious ideas as Duesberg's theories on AIDS and Van Flandern's futile attempts at refuting relativity. Bethell is only helping the opposition, by making the left's "Republicans are anti-science and conservatives are stupid" meme look more convincing to the undecided. We can't let the scientific illiteracy of a few drag us all down.