Governments around the world have bowed before the science gods. If a thing is scientific and scientifically proven in short term testing, it is good. It is to be approved for human use. If scientists cannot discover the cause of disease and aging, they can treat the effects. If one hundred people respond well to their medicine and gladly pay the purchase price, theyll sell it to millions. If one, two or ten of the one hundred develop other illnesses from the same medicine, the good outweighs the bad. The marketers get rich and the scientists keep their jobs. Too bad about the one or ten.

No one on earth is suffering from drug deficiency disease, yet American television advertising would have us believe we are all suffering from drug deficiency diseases. As physically ill as the American people are in general, the mind - body connection is marginalized by the science gods and mental illness wins elections.

We understand that scientists are as a rule, better educated than most of their potential victims, so we leave the heavy thinking to them and hope for the best. We hear that nuclear reactors can be much better constructed today than thirty years ago, which is to say, however good science is at any given point, there is always room for improvement and time provides it. This is also to say at any given time, any science is far from perfect and no one reasonably expects perfection in anything man made.

The fact is, most scientists are hirelings, paid to produce some profitable result for some corporate employer. As we can see from the current drug company scandals, which are but the tip of the iceberg compared to the revelations of the next few years, customers are guinea pigs and victims who bought the magic buzz words, scientifically proven.

How many people are killed and injured each year by standard medical practice? Nobody knows and very few care. We just point to average lifespan increase with no reference to quality issues and say, science good. We can decide to risk the side effects of any given medicine for the promised benefits. If we dont get the benefit, we change the dose, switch brands or try an entirely different one. Often we get the benefit and one or more side effects. If because we are not the typical patient and our side effect is not one of those listed on the packaging, we may be prescribed yet another medicine to deal with that side effect. If that produces a bad result because no one is sure what the combination might produce, how much damage have we already done to our natural body chemistry? No point asking your doctor. He probably knows less than you because the whole thing is your experience, not his.

The world could have had automobiles that achieved over two hundred miles per gallon fifty years ago and cars that ran on water and went even further on a gallon. But all that is garage and basement science so it is suppressed for the sake of Big Oil, Big Energy, Big Banking and Big Government profits. For fifty years we have been pouring 95% of our fuel purchases into our atmosphere. If science is wonderful, it is also selective and must first answer the question, who benefits? This is the non scientific, critical question that is asked in all marketing and political decisions that drive modern science.

Many of us have been in work situations where we find a worker dedicated to doing less to earn his pay than any other worker. Such is the work ethic of most commercial science. Scientists are rightly evolutionists on the whole. They labor long hours and years for incremental, evolutionary changes. If one of their associates develops a revolutionary solution to a problem, he is shunned and his work suppressed. Perhaps the best example of this is the late Nineteenth and early Twentieth Century inventor, Nikola Tesla. Nikola would have a vision of some practical device, build it, test it, then do the drawings for the patent application. At the same time, Thomas Edison would be working many months, 18-20 hours a day, inventing an electric light bulb by trial and error. Edison died a rich man. Tesla died a pauper and most of his best inventions never came to market. Scientific evolution has proved profitable for more than a century and revolution has been suppressed by those who would suffer economic losses or smaller profits. There are many more such examples from the Twentieth Century.

The great, revolutionary science is worked out in basements and garages around the world. No financing, no encouragement and no marketing. In the well funded private, corporate and university labs, evolutionary, incremental change is the unwritten rule.

And what is the promise of science that we should bow and worship at its altar? It is more and better for less. What if we suddenly decided to settle for less and better for less? Could commercial science provide, or would that be too revolutionary? A peddler goes from town to town selling snake oil. Many gather, some buy and the guardians of public welfare urge him to move along. Another peddler comes along selling snake oil in a white lab coat and the guardians of public welfare rent him an office. Go figure.