Bush's ethics policies: Damned if you do, damned if you don't...

There is an ongoing implication in the press that "religious fanatics" are destroying science research by interfering with government funding.

Two interesting articles confirm this but not how you expect.

The Scientist's headline is
"Ethics rules may hurt NIH staffing
Survey reveals undercurrent of discontent, fueling questions about the future of NIH"
90 percent feel rules are too restrictive
40 percent are looking for another job because of new ethics rules

Ah, but what rules are they talking about?

The 2005 reforms prohibit all NIH employees from conducting any outside consulting with pharmaceutical, biotech or medical device companies. The rules also limit stock ownership in biotechs, drug firms and other "substantially affected organizations" to $15,000 per company for about 200 senior NIH employees and their families.

The rules are designed to address concerns that surfaced after media reports and congressional investigations revealed that some NIH scientists and officials had received lucrative consulting contracts, fees and stock options from pharmaceutical and biotech companies.

On the other hand, Medscape has a video report (reg required) essentially saying "Financial Conflicts of Interest Are Related to Voting Patterns at FDA Advisory Committee Meetings"...

The report says scientists disclose possible conflict of interest but don't recluse themselves from panals judging if a medicine should be released, and states this is bad, but admits that it might be hard to find scientists who have no conflict of interest.

So it's damned if you do, damned if you don't.