In article et,
Maxprop wrote:

"Peter Wiley" wrote in message
. ..


Thing is, *nobody* I know goes into R&D in most areas with the
expectation that they'll get filthy rich. They do it because they're
interested in a particular type/class of problem. In fact, obsessed
would be a better word than interested. If they do get rich, it's a
nice side effect.

I think you've got blinders on, Pete. Motivations for doing research among
the gifted academics are as wide and varied as with any endeavor by anyone.
Seldom do researchers have the monocentric interest (obsession) that you
describe without other motives.

Yeah, I know that. But the big driver is interest/obsession IME. For
the best ones, at least.

Money is a big one these days, especially
in some fields where the payoff can be huge, such as genetic engineering.

For a lot, yes. I know a little about this field because I used to work
in a closely related area. In fact at one stage I was offered a full
scholarship to return to university and get a PhD in bioinformatics.
Decided life was too short to do this in my mid 40s & went back to sea
instead, but that's another story.

Prestige also tops the list--academics as a rule tend to be somewhat
egotistical, and peer recognition/adulation is a powerful motivator. So is
the desire to be the foremost individual in a particular field of endeavor.

Oh agreed. Moreso than money for R&D people.

It would be convenient to believe researchers have nothing but altruism
lighting their way, but that simply isn't the case, at least not very often.

I don't think I used the word 'altruism' anywhere. In fact I'm damn
certain I didn't. I've seen very senior & powerful researchers do
anything possible to preserve funding and/or get more to pursue their
pet hobbyhorses ragardless of any other factor to actually be under any
such delusion. The current global warming stuff is a lovely case in
point, actually, which I am observing from a close to ringside seat. I
am a data providor to some of this.

Most prominent research scientists won't normally discuss their motives,
apart from telling you they have " . . .always been obsessed with . . ."
their topic of choice, but the other motives are there, and they are
powerful.

Not a problem when you see them ****ed at conferences etc. Then the
truth comes out.

So - if those truly motivated in the main by money & prestige choose
some other profession than medicine, good. I don't regard a doctor
practising family medicine as all that much superior to a good auto
mechanic, to tell the truth.

Ridiculous. Next time you are seriously ill, consult your local mechanic.

About as useful and sensible as the next time I have a problem with my
interrelated software/hardware control systems, I should consult a
doctor. You'll have to do better than that, Max. I didn't say doctors
weren't skilled. Mostly, they are. The surgeon who put my arm together
did a pretty good job of it considering how badly I managed to smash
it. I'm happy with the end result. So what? A top orthopaedic surgeon
is a real good bone mechanic :-)

They get bored, in fact. Friend of mine has given up being a GP and is
doing a PhD in a health related area instead.

It's more than just boredom. It's frustration with the legal climate
surrounding health care, the governmental intervention that imposes more and
more controls over how a qualified physician can practice medicine, and the
eroding doctor-patient relationship, thanks to the first two items. A close
friend, a cardiac surgeon, threw in the towel six years ago and bought a
convenience store (grocery + gas station) in Montana. He had practiced for
24 years, been junk-sued twice (he won both), and watched his malpractice
premiums rise to the level of 25% of his annual gross income. His
professional group broke up for legal reasons, and he found himself alone,
having to be on call constantly. Since leaving medicine, he's a very happy
man. Before he was consistently frustrated and often angry.

We have been/are losing doctors in the OB/GYN specialties due to plain
stupid lawsuits so I hear you. Occasionally there's a glimmer of hope.

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117...9-1702,00.html

I had a suggestion for 'wrongful life' cases. We should just offer to
terminate them now, end of problem.

Don't get me started on lawyers.


The media paint a very one-sided, distorted view of medical people, Pete.
If you are forming your impressions from them, you really need to change
your information-gathering methods.

Umm, Max, I'm one of those oddball people who *read*. I don't own a TV
or a radio. I don't as a rule watch movies because I've found they're
mostly shallow and simplistic. However, I read a number of newspapers
and a wide range of scientific literature. I get to do this as part of
my job and also I do it for interest & entertainment. My opinions are
just that, but if they have congruence with the media, it's
coincidental.

As I said, I know a lot of doctors. I've designed & written software
that's running the entire NSW neonatal screening program and has
genetic data on well over a million children online. Perhaps my
familiarity has caused me to see them in a different light. I respect
the better ones' talent, skill and dedication, but I'm not in awe of
them nor do I respect them more highly than people in other demanding
professions.

PDW