Hacker News Reader

Big companies and industry groups wouldn't fund research unless they knew the outcome, or could influence the spin. If it didn't have a positive NPV, they wouldn't do it.

View on HN

That's probably true for a lot of studies, but companies with legitimately useful products would still be interested in getting independent validation so they can advertise said study, right? We are jaded by Coca-Cola, but there are actually healthy things and useful medications in the world!

Of course, in reality, the escrow may not be enough to remove the bias, but it's an interesting thought.

What you said is something I had in mind. While nefarious corporations might not even bother, I don't doubt that there are plenty of businesses out there who can hypothesize a high likelihood that a study will work in their favor and, therefore, it might be worth facilitating the research in a way to try and limit their influence. Granted, this is assuming a best-case universe where enough people actually care whether a study was done this way or not. Then again, maybe it's one of those things that should be tried to see what happens.

For a pool to work, would they need to offer money funding generic research on a topic, or anonymously fund specific research? The former doesn't allow for much incentive to the corporations, and the latter seems easily gamed.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com