Was discussing this very thing this morning. Who is funding the research and what do they stand to gain from the results being reported?
I wonder what percentage of the results being published - and especially what gets promoted outside of scholarly journals - don’t align with the financial and political best interests of those ultimately funding them. I suspect a very small percentage, and, even then, it gets intentionally buried.
There are countless examples of studies being pulled or research suppressed because the findings don't align with an agenda.
I would say most research is publicly funded, but often times that research is inaccessible without paying to view it, and in order to gain funding from public bodies, your objectives have to line up with their goals, and the results have to line up too in order for something to be published in a journal. There is gate-keeping at a funding level and at a publishing level, so that they can filter and shape the outcomes.
If you have entered a field with the best of intentions, in order to get funding, you have to toe the line or else your research will never get anywhere. This same tactic is employed in all facets of society, and I think a lot of it stems from our fiat-based system coupled with peoples mentality of 'just doing their jobs'.
The entire system needs to be rebuilt.
This has been my suspicion for some time. The implications of it being even somewhat accurate are staggering. At best, the ‘science/data’ we are given is immediately untrustworthy requiring retesting done via independent, uncompromised channels. At worst, the world is being lied to for the purposes of control and financial gain and have little-to-no means of deriving truth.
How do we proceed?
