'We Have to Go Where the Money Is'—Dilemmas in the Role of Nutrition Scientists: An Interview Study [Book Review]
Graduate studies at Western
Minerva 47 (2):217-236 (2009)
|Abstract||In Western societies scientists are increasingly expected to seek media exposure and cooperate with industry. Little attention has been given to the way such expectations affect the role of scientific experts in society. To investigate scientists’ own perspectives on these issues eight exploratory, in-depth interviews were conducted in Denmark with reputable nutrition scientists. Additionally, eight interviews were held with ‘key informants’ from the field of nutrition policy. It was found that nutrition scientists experience two dilemmas: first, between their aspiration to make a collective impact on public health and the powerful incentives of each to appear frequently in the media with new messages; second, between their need to cooperate with the food industry for financial reasons and their fear that this may compromise their independence and scientific integrity. It is argued that the dilemmas identified in this study should be dealt with openly by the relevant groups of scientists.|
|Keywords||Independence Integrity Credibility Public role Nutrition experts Qualitative methodology|
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Anna Paldam Folker, Hanne Andersen & Peter Sandøe (2008). Implicit Normativity in Scientific Advice: Values in Nutrition Scientists' Decisions to Give Public Advice. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 51 (2):199-206.
H. O. Kunkel & Paul B. Thompson (1988). Interests and Values in National Nutrition Policy in the United States. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 1 (4):241-256.
Gitte Meyer & Peter Sandøe (2012). Going Public: Good Scientific Conduct. Science and Engineering Ethics 18 (2):173-197.
Joshua Knobe & Richard Samuels (forthcoming). Thinking Like a Scientist: Innateness as a Case Study. Cognition.
Mike Cooley (1995). The Myth of the Moral Neutrality of Technology. AI and Society 9 (1):10-17.
Ellen M. Maccarone (2005). The Ethics of Advocacy. Environmental Philosophy 2 (1):44-53.
K. Brad Wray (2003). Is Science Really a Young Man's Game? Social Studies of Science 33:137-49.
Guy Cook, Elisa Pieri & Peter T. Robbins, The Scientists Think and the Public Feels : Expert Perceptions of the Discourse of GM Food.
Robert R. Kuehn, Scientific Speech: Protecting the Right of Environmental Scientists to Express Professional Opinions.
George Dow Scott (1942). Heredity, Food, and Environment in the Nutrition of Infants and Children. Boston, Chapman and Grimes.
Hauke Riesch (2010). Simple or Simplistic? Scientists' Views on Occam's Razor. Theoria 25 (1):75-90.
Nicholas Evans (2010). Speak No Evil: Scientists, Responsibility, and the Public Understanding of Science. [REVIEW] Nanoethics 4 (3):215-220.
Daniela M. Bailer-Jones (2002). Scientists' Thoughts on Scientific Models. Perspectives on Science 10 (3):275-301.
David L. Hull (1998). Studying the Study of Science Scientifically. Perspectives on Science 6 (3):209-231.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2010-12-11
Total downloads1 ( #292,081 of 739,315 )
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?