Accomplishing change in the institutions that control and manipulate society for their personal benefit has been difficult. Inability to succeed in the endeavor is due to the inability to create the organizations that can effectively oppose the powers that exercise control. This control is maintained by investment. Protecting the investment by preventing alternative teaching and preaching is the first line of defense. Knowledge is a challenge to power.
Modern science and scientific methods promote developments, analyze problems, and guide solutions to the problems. Those in control, more and more, proceed with archaic science, in which they are invested, and eschew scientific methods that interfere with the conclusions they prefer.
A two-part article examines a few examples that explain the dilemma.
Take economics, which is accepted as a dismal science. If it were a science, there would not be several schools of economics in the same disciplines, each having its own endowed college. Economic education is dominated by theories that defy practical applications and applications that cannot predict, prevent, or ameliorate periodic crises. Students learn economics from unverified theories, many contradicting each other, which leads to confused understandings of the discipline and complicated approaches to resolve problems. I examined five accepted theories, proved them wrong, and sent my findings to Economic Department heads in about 50 universities. Heard from only one individual. Others were content with not examining the possibility that they may be teaching falsehoods
True science demands an accepted postulate from which theoretical analysis continues. Capitalism had its contradictions that led to "boom" and "bust," until some wise economists realized that government intervention in the economic system could ameliorate the intensity of the swings. Why has intervention worked? Capitalism cannot generate more capital and advance without the money supply increasing. Because money enters the economy, from either bank loans (private debt) or by Federal Reserve open market operations (public debt), all money is debt. The latter is a postulate for the Capitalist system.
The postulate leads to Capitalism advancing a far as public debt can be sustained. Credit reaches a peak and, as debt is repaid, the money supply shrinks and demand for products diminish. Capitalism has a short life. Enter government borrowing at lower interest rates and able to roll over the debt, essentially never repaying the debt. Add government spending in a managed economy and Capitalism is rescued. Capitalists who decry government intervention do not realize that their breath depends on government supplying the oxygen.
Why is this significant?
Scientific method starts with an accepted postulate. From "all money is debt," we proceed along a defined trail of proofs that uncover the workings of the economy and not along a confused path determined by who shouts louder. A defined path leads to predictable outcomes; erratic assumptions lead to catastrophes.
Natural selection
Another bête noir is natural selection. How can natural selection explain the development of the complex human body with its autonomic nervous systems, emotions, and biological apparatuses that can only exist if all their parts arose in a defined order or simultaneously? Doubts of natural selection's authenticity are contemptuously squashed. Alternatives theories are ridiculed. Directed evolution or Intelligent Design, where a species guides its development in response to the environment, is sidetracked to being a belief in a higher being, and is identified with the Discovery Institute, which is a mixture of scientists and theologians.
Lamarck's theory of inheritance of acquired characteristics has been proven true in many studies and adequately explains what natural selection cannot explain. The theory is intentionally derided by the entrenched cadre of natural selection supporters. Their principal complaint is that no mechanism exists to inherit the characteristics, now contradicted by observations that acquired characteristics have been inherited by epigenetics, and might be by other mechanisms that still defy discovery. No academic discussion of the topic is allowed.
Empirical proof for natural selection is meagre and what is offered is better understood by inheritance of acquired characteristics.
1. Peppered Moths: Before the Industrial Revolution in England, light-colored peppered moths were common, camouflaged against lichen-covered trees. Dark moths were rare. With industrial pollution, tree trunks darkened with soot, and the lichen died. The dark moths were now better camouflaged from bird predators. The population rapidly shifted to almost entirely dark moths. This has been cited as a direct observation of natural selection, of shifting allele frequencies due to selective pressure.
Note the phrase, "The population rapidly shifted to almost entirely dark moths." Natural selection is a long-long term process. Inheritance of acquired characteristics, in which genes are switched "on" and 'off" to adapt to the environment, is a rapid process. Michael Nachman and colleagues at the University of Arizona have pinpointed camouflage mutations of rock pocket mice to a gene MC1R, which acts as a control for how dark and light pigments are produced. Same with peppered moths.
2. Darwin's Finches: Peter and Rosemary Grant spent decades studying finches in the Galápagos. They documented that during a severe drought, birds with larger and deeper beaks were better able to crack the tough seeds and survived. The average beak size in the population increased measurably after a single season. When rains returned and smaller seeds became abundant, the average beak size shifted back. The Grants determined this was direct evidence of natural selection in response to environmental change.
Note again the rapid change, not characteristic of natural selection and the "response to environmental change," which is a characteristic of Lamarck's inheritance of acquired characteristics. Clifford Tabin and colleagues at Harvard Medical School in Boston have shown that a protein (Bmp) determines beak size and shape in Darwin's finches. For the switch that turns on genes involved in increasing beak length, the investigation focused on calmodulin, a messenger protein that transduces calcium signals by binding calcium ions and then modifying their interactions with various target proteins. Change the environment, stimulate calmodulin, and change the beak size.
3. Antibiotic Resistance in Bacteria: When a population of bacteria was exposed to an antibiotic, natural selection advocates claimed a few bacteria may have had a random mutation that made them resistant. The antibiotic killed the susceptible bacteria, leaving the resistant ones to reproduce. The next generation was almost entirely resistant. They saw this in hospitals worldwide, forcing the development of new drugs. To them, this is natural selection in action.
Poor reasoning. Harvard experimenters used bacteria that could not grow in a specific environment because they lacked a working gene for an enzyme needed to metabolize the only available food. By genetic engineering, the bacteria were given versions of the necessary gene in which the coded message was, in effect, scrambled and therefore useless. Most, if not all, the bacteria failed to grow. After a few days they began thriving, feeding and reproducing. The distribution of bacteria colonies that survived showed that many bacteria had unscrambled the code and performed self-directed mutations that corrected the deficiency. Self-directed mutations and not random mutations enabled the bacteria to survive.
Scientific fulfillment is not the only reason driving the Neo-Lamarckians. Lamarckian evolution, as a driving force of directed evolution, enhances social progress. Natural Selection deters progress.
Medicine
The medical profession and its allied government agencies, services, pharmaceutical and medical equipment industries condemn themselves by their excessive public relations and product advertising. Similar to Trump, those who constantly tell us how great they are must be defending themselves against exposure. Watching television is watching a few minutes of entertainment, interrupted by several minutes of commercials for drugs that have esoteric names, deadly side effects, and may, together with exercise and healthy foods (another questionable industry), decrease your symptoms by a few percent.
Medical science has developed drugs that combat disease and enhance life. Surgical methods that repair and replace organs and bones have been extraordinary. On the other hand, excessive use of dubious drugs has hampered the reputation of the medical profession; medical advances have become less allied with enriching pedestrian life and more allied with enriching corporate life. Medicine has become more promotion, using dubious statistics and prejudicial observations rather than theory and refined heuristicsto guide diagnostics and health solutions. As examples:
Daily intake of vitamins and minerals are recommended enhancements for increasing the quality of life. Are there any benefits to multivitamins? Nutrition experts at Johns Hopkins are dubious.
Half of all American adults -- including 70 percent of those age 65 and older -- take a multivitamin or another vitamin or mineral supplement regularly. The total price tag exceeds $12 billion per year -- money that Johns Hopkins nutrition experts say might be better spent on nutrient-packed foods like fruit, vegetables, whole grains and low-fat dairy products.
The researchers concluded that multivitamins don't reduce the risk for heart disease, cancer, cognitive decline (such as memory loss and slowed-down thinking) or an early death. They also noted that in prior studies, vitamin E and beta-carotene supplements appear to be harmful, especially at high doses.
Drug trials and testing made made to appear as if getting approval is a major advancement in therapy. Examine the highly touted Lecanemab and Donanemab as Therapies for Alzheimer's Disease.
In summary, the new mAb do not improve cognition but rather reduce the decline by an arguably smaller magnitude than donepezil and below the individual threshold of perception for most patients, carrying a worrisome safety profile. The advantage of these drugs seems to be related more to the theoretical possibility that they are disease modifying (in keeping with the prevailing framework of amyloid toxicity), rather than in their actual risk/cost-benefit trade-off. Before these expensive drugs are administered broadly, both the safety profile of subgroups and the efficacy relative to the benchmark drug donepezil should ideally be tested. If this does not happen, we risk adopting a potentially less effective drug with significant potential harm over the benchmark drug on the market, donepezil. Excess deaths occur with mAb infusions along with frequent brain swelling and bleeding. This concern is all the more acute given the acceleration of brain volume loss they induce (Alves et al., 2023)
The small and uncertain benefits, the worrisome and poorly understood risks, and the very high costs of treatment suggest that these drugs are promoted largely out of theoretical rather than practical benefits. For patients and society -- both of whom bear the costs of this treatment -- caveat emptor.
Left out of medical studies and the surge to market drugs for profit is an important consideration; health is a socio-economic problem. Reports have shown that a large inequality in the distributions of wealth and income are more significant factors than either absolute poverty or low income in determining the health of deprived populations.
The research and analysis that demonstrate the significance of effect of disparity in income on health emphasizes the unwillingness of social, medical and economic disciplines to validate the research. During the last century, advances in health were more due to advances in the socio-economic system, and much less to medical advances.
At the same time government regulation and social factors enabled cleaner water and safer environments. Although the introduction of vaccines and antibiotics have had a role in controlling communicable diseases, these diseases were already on a decline before modern controlled methods.
If social and economic inequalities cause inequalities in health, then it's obvious that reducing the former will reduce the latter. This means attacking the wage and benefit scales from both sides; increasing wages and benefits for the less fortunate and reducing the wages and benefits for the more fortunate. Why should the person who labors at irregular hours to clean a floor be much less rewarded than the person who walks the floor and labors easily during regular hours? Income can be more fairly distributed with total wages and benefits in the system remaining the same. The health will increase for those presently at the low end of the scale and will stay the same for those at the high end of the scale.
The United States government has successfully regulated behavior (tobacco laws, intravenous users, and pollution), and this type of regulation has greatly improved the health of its citizens. The government has also regulated the economic system (minimum wage laws, anti-trust laws, communication and exchange commissions, and banking laws) and this regulation has served to improve the health of its citizens. The government can do more for public health by applying pressure that narrows income distribution.
Space Exploration
Walking among the stars is an unequalled scientific accomplishment. In space exploration, there is no lack of application of scientific methods to resolve immense problems and create gigantic achievements. The more satisfactory word is benefits. What benefit have the scientific achievements in space exploration been to mankind?
I am referring specifically to manned space efforts and not to some of the unmanned space explorations or to satellite use in telecommunication, geolocation services, and surveillance. NASA's list of 20 breakthroughs in space aboard the international space station are not impressive and many could have been done on solid earth in an artificially created gravity free environment. Maybe, it is just me, but I don't care to examine moon and Mars rocks and am content with what is seen by telescope. The Viking I landing on Mars generated enticing headlines of "life discovered on Mars," and degenerated into a possibility of traces of water under the barren landscape.
Sending manned spacecraft to Mars baffles me. Remove a helmet for one breath, and you are dead in seconds. Your blood will literally boil, and that's not even the worst part. Mars has no ozone layer in its atmosphere as Earth does, and ultraviolet radiation from the Sun and astronomical sources reaches the surface unhindered. NASA scientists reported that "a possible Mars mission may involve great radiation risk, with the calculated radiation dose being 0.66 sieverts round-trip while the agency's career radiation limit for astronauts is 1 sievert. In mid-September 2017, NASA reported temporarily doubled radiation levels on the surface of Mars with an aurora 25 times brighter than any observed earlier due to a massive unexpected solar storm. A thin layer of gold on current space helmet visors shields the face from harmful parts of the Sun's spectrum, with visor designs having the goal of allowing astronauts to see while blocking ultraviolet and heat besides meeting pressure requirements. Breathing equipment would need radiation shielding that makes a nuclear reactor's containment system look basic."
Breathing carbon dioxide, fighting dust storms, enduring temperature swings of -80 degrees Fahrenheit to 70 degrees in one day, and protecting the body from radiation is not a healthy way to live. Not much energy nor time left to build a sand castle on the red planet.
Conclusion
Obtaining control is prerequisite to accomplishing change. Concentration of efforts on imposing rather than exposing, confronting rather than debating, doing rather than preaching, teaching rather than intellectualizing, and not giving lip service to those who seal the lips augment the chances of gaining control. True, easily said than done. The depth and tightness of the mechanisms of control are difficult to reach and unbind.
Part II will examine the political control that has made the United States party to the genocide of the Palestinian people.