Do you know the difference between *instruction* and
*selection*? Organisms are selected by their environment, based on
the instruction they were born with. Of course industry doesn't take
scientists and twist them into a sad mockery of their former selves. It
selects, ie hires, ie "buys," its employees on the basis of
perceived shared values and interests(instruction). They hire those
who they have reason to believe will cooperate in their research
agenda *on their own initiative.*
>and the source of my funding never has, and never will affect the
>data the result from the studies.
This focus on data and results is misleading. In the
scientific tradition, data are used in attempts to falsify
hypotheses. The generation of the hypotheses themselves is up for
grabs, and can be conditioned by literally anything. Including human
values. Read your Popper.
> Your innuendos attempt to substitute fears and suspicions for
> hard data and contribute nothing to assisting a consumer make an informed
> choice regarding BST.
What *you're* attempting to do is substitute hard data for a
principled discussion of exactly what the hypotheses in question are,
and how falsifiable they may or may not be.
> Specifically, which data cited in the 20 studies posted earlier do you
> dispute?
Data do not generate conclusions. They are used only to test
those that have already been conjectured. So what is Bauman's
conjecture? and how was it tested? how testable was it? Those are
the kinds of things we need to know at this point.
-- ___________________________________ @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ @ KRONSTADT 1921- NIKOGDA NE ZABYVAEM @ @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@