Since last post: 1718 days Last activity: 585 days
#1 Posted on 9.11.04 0739.10 Reposted on: 9.11.11 0742.15
From Johns Hopkins Magazine. I find it very interesting that these particular studies are being followed as well as the fact that the groups basically shifted the responsibility to other gov't groups. As an education researcher, this type of stuff make me cringe due to the covert nature of it.
Originally posted by Johns Hopkins MagazineIn October 2003, conservative members of the U.S. House of Representatives prompted a hearing on 10 research grants funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH). The grants included studies of Asian sex workers in San Francisco and women's responses to pornography, and some in Congress wanted to know why taxpayers' money was paying for that sort of thing. After Rep. Michael Ferguson (R-N.J.) asked NIH for information on the supposed public benefits of the 10 studies, an NIH staff member contacted the House Energy and Commerce Committee, co-sponsor of the hearing, and requested a list of the grants in question.
That staff member got back more than expected: not summaries of 10 projects, but page after page of NIH grants, dozens of them, all seemingly listed because the research involved prostitution, substance abuse, homosexuality, or sexually transmitted diseases. By mistake, someone on Energy and Commerce had revealed a list that was making the rounds of Republican members of Congress, a list of 181 NIH-funded researchers whose studies had been targeted by a conservative religious lobbying group, the Traditional Values Coalition.
#2 Posted on 9.11.04 0924.00 Reposted on: 9.11.11 0925.11
Part of me has always had an aversion to government funded research, not because of the content, but because of the concept of government funding specific research aimed at getting the results it wants.
At the same time, I would like to see the list of 181 targeted studies. I'm sure some of them are superfluous...
ALL ORIGINAL POSTS IN THIS THREAD ARE NOW AVAILABLE