Cris Delnevo
@crisdelnevo.bsky.social
unapologetic Gen Xer. survey geek, policy wonk, 1st gen
RT≠endorse, opinions≠Rutgers
RT≠endorse, opinions≠Rutgers
Reposted by Cris Delnevo
is this written policy somewhere for all of NIH? i see it in the NCI final plan.. but cant find anything else
July 24, 2025 at 4:10 PM
is this written policy somewhere for all of NIH? i see it in the NCI final plan.. but cant find anything else
Reposted by Cris Delnevo
Not every decision requires an RCT (and no RCT is infinitely generalizable).
Scientists would do well to incorporate power and wealth and their agendas into their thinking about scientific progress. Science is political by its nature, but for pro-democracy parties, it should not be partisan.
Scientists would do well to incorporate power and wealth and their agendas into their thinking about scientific progress. Science is political by its nature, but for pro-democracy parties, it should not be partisan.
6. That’s the dynamic I see it here.
To what degree should corporations be liable for harms that they cause as judged by the best available science and a consensus among experts?
If I can’t sue Philip Morris for selling cigarettes to kids without a double blind trial to prove harm, we are sunk.
To what degree should corporations be liable for harms that they cause as judged by the best available science and a consensus among experts?
If I can’t sue Philip Morris for selling cigarettes to kids without a double blind trial to prove harm, we are sunk.
June 14, 2025 at 1:32 AM
Not every decision requires an RCT (and no RCT is infinitely generalizable).
Scientists would do well to incorporate power and wealth and their agendas into their thinking about scientific progress. Science is political by its nature, but for pro-democracy parties, it should not be partisan.
Scientists would do well to incorporate power and wealth and their agendas into their thinking about scientific progress. Science is political by its nature, but for pro-democracy parties, it should not be partisan.