Ethics in research question

S. A. Modena samodena at
Wed Aug 18 09:44:01 EST 1993

In article <hines.745636749 at> hines at (Wade Hines) writes:
>ogil at (Brian W. Ogilvie) writes:
>The principal job of a principal investigator is to raise funds.
               ^^^                ^^^^^^^^^^^^             ^^^^^

The way to "fix" this situation is to have a place on the grant form
and on the publication titled: Principle Fundraiser 

>If they have lots of money, then they can do research. If they can't
>get money, then they can try to do research but the main job is to

Probably a correct prioritization of the pecking order that operates.
It may very well be that there is an *excess* of scientifically brilliant
minds and a *deficit* of successful *business/political* minds.

>raise funds and if this means smoozing with congresspersons, so
>bit[e] it.

>As to names on papers, it is fair for a PI to add their name if
>they wrote the grant which funded the work because they conceived
>of the project. Still, there are many cases where this is abused.

CONCEPT papers should be published in *conceptual* journals and *research*
reports be published where they traditionally are.

You say there is no market for concept journals...well that settles that
question.  :^)

In private enterprise the *company* (stockholders as represented by the
CEO) "own" the fruits of research and development.  Though patents and
copyrights can only be assigned to warmbodies, *assignment* clauses of
personnel contracts take care of who *really* owns intellectual properties.
But at least the *reassignment* is *clearly* seperated so that there is no
ambiguity about inspirational contribution and financial contribution.

steve   nmodena at

Steve   nmodena at

More information about the Bioforum mailing list