I did just that in the very first post you started arguing with me on and even gave you a link so you could read the whole story. He has an existing and presumably ongoing business relationship with Merck; his is not an independent opinion.
And as for you, I would take some time to think about the approach you have laid out here and what conclusion one would come to by following it in another "soft" science - climatology. If I followed your mode of thinking that would compel me to believe in AGW, because the "experts" agree. Or heck, that would compel me to believe in tarot, fortune telling, or any other flavor of shamanism, because those who make it their living are the experts on the subject.
Medicine - and cancer medicine in particular - is no exact science that these kind of statements can be made with certainty, as if they were somehow mathematical laws, for the same reasons that the climate doomers couldn't make their claims with certainty. All the experts in any subject have a bias to make the subject appear more important than it is, because to them in particular, it is.
When it comes down to recommending a vaccine that only really matters if your kid is a slut, is it really the responsible thing to say take this vaccine, instead of teaching her not to be self-destructive? Seriously, this treats young women like herd animals - it is properly their choice to make, and mandating it from government is politicians practicing medicine. Coerced medicine is the practice of coercion, and not that of medicine.
I am not sure what you are arguing, but Rush said this morning that the Perry actions did not constitute crony capitalism nor were they a pay to play or other type of illegal action and that Bachman and Palin were wrong to make that insinuation.
Bachman may have destroyed her campaign last night. Palin’s has yet to begin.
If you had any evidence of a legitimate conflict of interest you'd be able to articulate it here rather than referring us to some article that offers no such evidence. You know there isn't any evidence in the article so you are left trying to change the subject. The only reason you believe that this conflict exists is because you have no clue as to how research is conducted or who is involved.
He has an existing and presumably ongoing business relationship with Merck; his is not an independent opinion.
So what? Find me one major research hospital that doesn't have deep ties to the pharmaceutical industry. The reason this country discovers 90% of all the new drugs brought to market is because our universities, hospitals and drug companies collaborate to make it happen.
While all of this is happening without your knowledge, you sit at your keyboard damning the very process that has made it possible to live a longer and healthier life than at any other time in our history. Luddites are a trip.
The rest of your post is garbage.