http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8334774.stm

This looks like it could be a crucial stage in the battle for evidence
based policy-making in politics. It's quite clear that the current
Labout Government would rather reject scientific fact than risk the wrath
of hysterical tabloid newspapers. If this direction proves successful, I
would expect the incoming Tory govt to continue and ramp up the assault on
science based policy making, as this has historically been the case...

Mark

--

On Oct 30, 10:55 pm, Mark.Wri...@bristol.ac.uk wrote:
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8334774.stm
>
> This looks like it could be a crucial stage in the battle for evidence
> based policy-making in politics. It's quite clear that the current
> Labout Government would rather reject scientific fact than risk the wrath
> of hysterical tabloid newspapers. If this direction proves successful, I
> would expect the incoming Tory govt to continue and ramp up the assault on
> science based policy making, as this has historically been the case...
>
> Mark
>
> --

Do you think there is a distinction between different areas of
science? Are governments more willing to listen to scientists about
the environment or nuclear power than medicine for example?

Lance

On 30 Oct, 20:55, Mark.Wri...@bristol.ac.uk wrote:
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8334774.stm
>
> This looks like it could be a crucial stage in the battle for evidence
> based policy-making in politics. It's quite clear that the current
> Labout Government would rather reject scientific fact than risk the wrath
> of hysterical tabloid newspapers. If this direction proves successful, I
> would expect the incoming Tory govt to continue and ramp up the assault on
> science based policy making, as this has historically been the case...
>
> Mark
>
> --

The Lib Dem reaction seems the most appropriate to me.  Clearly,
Professor Nutt has been sacked for embarassing the government.  Policy
is often based on ideology and public opinion rather than on
evidence,  but simply suppressing evidence when it is inconvenient is
not the way to go!

Dave Smith

Lance  wrote:
: Do you think there is a distinction between different areas of
: science? Are governments more willing to listen to scientists about
: the environment or nuclear power than medicine for example?

Medicine does seem to be particularly bad generally. Although there is
also GM food, where policy has little basis in fact. (I personally have
many issues with GM food, but they are not science based - they are from
skepticism on the business motivation of GM companies, and their thirst to
patent genetic code and control future food production).

Mark

--

A good response today in the Guardian:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/oct/31/bad-science-influence-sun-moon

Mark

--