An article published on the University of Washington in St. Louis’s website announced that they and Pfizer will be working more closely to develop new drugs to put on the market. The article promises that the union of the two institutions, one a public university and the other a pharmaceutical power house, will be equal. Both Pfizer and the University will have an equal say on projects and research. The details of the collaboration were not revealed, so that lends me to speculate on whether this will bring about positive “social” change, as they both claim, or another situation in where a company takes advantage of a public institution to promote their sales and company name.
Reaction
There are a few big issues in both the Frontline(Persuaders, PBS.com) video and No Logo(Naomi Klein) that are very disturbing. The ease of success that private companies have infiltrated not only Universities, but high schools is offensive to our education traditions. People from all parts of the world come to America for education purposes. We have built a name for the quality of our higher education institution that the rest of the world envies, and the only effect that placing ads in the life of our students will have is to dumb down or education system. The only way companies should be allowed to advertise at Universities is through scholarship donations. Companies should have no control over research performed at Universities to protect the integrity of the particular research and the integrity of the University itself. Our country is becoming increasingly fascist, with corporations having more and more influence and control on public policy, and protecting our educational institutions from this corporatization should be a high priority
1 comment:
THis is nothing new, companies have been funneling resources at academic institutions for decades to try and get problems solved. Whether the independent researchers are following their objectives as well as their relative success determines if the money keeps coming in. THere is a fine medium between company research which involves detailed account for ones time ensuring one stays on task to follow a strict list of objectives and research at an academic institution that affords one more freedom. The point is, the two coming together to form a more thorough effort that intertwines the ability to explore new methodology as well as solving real world problems is not a bad thing. Don't be confused. This isn't a company running an academic instituion, that is illegal. When you join any major corporation you go through their own educational program in a sense, some more thorough than others.
plus
If Merck sponsored my lab, that would give me better resources to do my research and interaction with a potential future employer.
I will say less money to war and more money to research would give the NIH more of a chance to avoid support from scheming companies... but who is to say the government even with an unbiased(yeah right) team of scientists will successfully and efficiently allot money to the right people.
but real world problems need to be brought to the attention of researchers
NDP wouldn't have a robotics team if they didn't use daimler chrysler... reaction?
Post a Comment