What Happens When Science Goes Private

 

One of the most troubling aspects of the neoliberal era is the privatization of scientific research out of the public eye.  Taking science in-house, behind the corporate curtain, under the thumb of the "invisible hand" has become today's normal.

In his 2003 book, "Our Final Hour," former head of the Royal Society and Britain's astronomer royal, Lord Simon Rees canvases the pitfalls and perils of industry-dominated scientific research.

One problem is that research that has the brightest commercial prospects usually gets the go-ahead over research that may be far more important to society but less profitable. Industry charts the course of research. Profit determines priority. The private sector usurps the public agenda.

Risk is likewise harder to monitor and control when it's out of sight. Risk takes on another dimension when it is filtered by a profit factor. Numbers can be fudged, claims can be falsified and don't count on your government to protect you even in blatant cases.

A report in The Guardian shows the lengths industry will go to mislead regulators of hazardous substances, "forever chemicals," being unleashed on the public.


Chemical giants DuPont and Daikin knew the dangers of a PFAS compound widely used in food packaging since 2010, but hid them from the public and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), company studies obtained by the Guardian reveal.

The chemicals, called 6:2 FTOH, are now linked to a range of serious health issues, and Americans are still being exposed to them in greaseproof pizza boxes, carryout containers, fast-food wrappers, and paperboard packaging.

Daikin withheld a 2009 study that indicated toxicity to lab rats’ livers and kidneys, while DuPont in 2012 did not alert the FDA or public to new internal data that indicated that the chemical stays in animals’ bodies for much longer than initially thought.

Science from industry, the FDA and independent researchers now links 6:2 FTOH to kidney disease, liver damage, cancer, neurological damage, developmental problems and autoimmune disorders, while researchers also found higher mortality rates among young animals and mothers exposed to the chemicals.

Had the FDA seen the data, it is unlikely that it would have approved 6:2 FTOH, said Maricel Maffini, an independent researcher who studies PFAS in food packaging. And though Daikin may have broken the law, it and DuPont, which has previously been caught hiding studies that suggest toxicity in PFAS, are not facing any repercussions.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Navigating the Minefield of Short-Termism

The Gun We Point at Our Own Heads

The Cognoscenti Syndrome