Academia is absolutely rife with corruption, and it’s a dirty, disgusting secret I’d love to let you in on.
Somewhere along the lines, a maternal authority figure should have advised you against crying over spilled milk. It’s a great little aphorism of stoicism, but in the case of an incident at the University of Maryland, I recommend disregarding the wisdom. I’m not advocating maudlin sobbing, more crying in the Shakespearean sense of “Cry ‘Havoc!’, and let slip the dogs of war”, or the more archaic “hue and cry” sense. It’s a silly little story, and easily glossed over. And I can forgive the public for passing it by; they don’t know any better. But the University should be livid, and they aren’t, and I want you to understand that the all of this should be mortifying.
This started back in January, when U Maryland started coming under scrutiny for a press release (since pulled) they fired off about a study in progress, which is common practice. This press release indicated that a study being conducted at their illustrious university was finding out that kids who drank a certain brand of chocolate milk were benefiting from improved cognitive and motor functions, even after suffering from concussions. “Sounds like bullshit”, my buddy said when I mentioned this to him. Hopefully that’s your reaction as well. Unfortunately, gullible idiots, who also happen to be, say, in charge of a school district read “science says [brand] chocolate milk cures concussions” and acted accordingly. This is one of those studies that, people in charge of the schools aside, most people could see as dubious from a mile away. So people actually started giving the University flack.
As a result, the University–wait for it–formed a committee to investigate the issue. And by issue, I mean a minor symptom of a systemic disaster. The committee report was published at the end of March, and the media is following up on the news. Jesse Signal did an estimable job reporting via NYMag, and I’ll recommend his article–I’m not a huge fan of him generally, but credit where it’s due. Nota bene his explanation of P-values in the article is incorrect; it’s a very, very common mistake even among otherwise smart people, and an understandable one, but it’s wrong nonetheless (here’s a better one). Mr. Signal is a science enthusiast, but has not himself been a scientist, and not working in the field makes it hard to understand just how fucked up the whole situation is, but I’ll give him props for sensing something is amiss (and again, it was a competent piece of journalism). “This is a scandal. Again: How the hell could the University of Maryland have allowed this to happen?” he concludes his piece. The University committee report has no such urgency, nor did any other site I found, excepting perhaps Retraction Watch, which is run and viewed by a niche group of jaded industry people who flag retracted papers, etc. and is implicitly pissed about everything they produce–which I endorse with alacrity. What sickened me was reading the article from Inside Higher Ed, which ended its article “Despite the extensive reform recommended by the report for research and publicity procedures, officials Friday said the problems with Shim’s chocolate milk research were an anomaly”, followed by a quote from a University administrator explaining that. It’s reporting facts, right? Journalism 101? No, it’s reporting things people said germane to a topic. Those are not always facts. It’s critically important to understand that distinction, and IHE misses it by a mile here.
People like Signal and others rightly question the bona fides of the study. The conflict of interest is clear as day to anyone with half a brain who isn’t corrupt. The study wasn’t reviewed before publications were made–even the University caught that one. These topics are all will and good to discuss, and I fault no man for wanting something to muse about during dinner. “Did you see that gorgeous last-minute basket by Villanova to win it all? God, that’s how you clench a championship.” “Nah, didn’t see it.” “Oh…. So, did you hear….”
This chocolate milk incident was absolutely NOT an anomaly. It is, in fact, completely normal, and was 100% predictable, and it will absolutely happen again.
To use an analogy, this was a man fucking the 15 year old babysitter and having his wife walk in on them. The man apologizes profusely. The couple talks about ways they could avoid this in the future. They consider hiring male babysitters, but frankly there’s not a good supply. So maybe ugly–or at least not-super-attractive–girls. And maybe only ones over 18. The wife will come home sooner, and she’ll be in charge of driving the sitter home. And the man must promise not to do it again. I mean, it was an anomaly, after all. Signal at least has the wherewithal to ask, “wait, why did he cheat in the first place?” It is possible that the man is truly repentant, except he’s not. The girls in the neighborhood call him Creepy Old Guy, and the ones with daddy issues have his phone number. They call me and complain that he keeps texting them, and…. Anyway, the man cheats because he’s a cheater, and we’re all hung up on Lolita the babysitter. The problem isn’t her, it’s him. And if you want him to stop cheating, we have to focus on him. His motivations may be multifaceted, but at the end of the day he doesn’t respect his wife, the law, or boundaries enough not to do it. I don’t have a brilliant, surefire solution (church? therapy? jail?), but I know it doesn’t involve tweaking the sitter.
So back to the situation at hand. The committee report is a bit tedious, but it outlines the incident well. Maryland has an initiative called the Maryland Industrial Partnerships Program (MIPS), which was passed by the government in ’87 to allow private business to use the public University to conduct research to enhance said businesses. I’m not even being conspiratorial with this; they straight-up advertise it. I can also pretty much guarantee that the word “jobs” is said (possibly literally) every sentence used by administrators and politicians when referring to this…. Maryland is not the only university to do this; they are not an anomaly. I would guess most universities do this–I know mine does. The execution varies, but essentially, public universities partner with private business to do business R&D. Politicians sell this by saying it will make jobs by empowering businesses. I find it completely and utterly repulsive. Nationwide, universities are multi-trillion–with a fucking T–dollar investments propped up by the taxpayers, either through land-grants and tax-exemptions, straight-up cash subsidies, or subsidized tuition loans among other methods, and whether that’s a moral/good system is debatable, but nonetheless they are granted their obscene wealth on the presumption that they are built to further the education of our citizens and conduct research for the benefit of the nation. While they may do that, they are also corporations as freewheeling as any for-profit business, and often run by titans of industry and local aristocracy (euphemistically referred to as philanthropists). The board of trustees is usually in charge of a university, and they are usually appointed by the state’s governor (there are exceptions, but this is a tendency). Check out the University of Maryland’s Board. Take a gander at the job titles of the board members. “Retired professor of X” is pretty much non existent whereas “CEO of local major business” is the norm. Again, Maryland is not an outlier here. Check your local university out for yourself. Even if these people are not directly profiting form their position, being in charge of a university is a considerable amount of power. Universities are frequently the largest employer in the area, and they’re non-profits (tax free, to a large extent). You can hook people up, and it’s a big prestige boost. And considering that the government picks the members, that involves political power into the equation. You think those guys don’t have their business corporations put money into political PACs to fund campaigns? Businessmen buy politicians, politicians buy businessmen, and the public pays for it all.
Academic research is conducted by faculty members called Principal Investigators, or PI’s for short. They are basically in charge of running experiments, and making sure the paperwork is filled out correctly. It’s a job without a good analogy in most occupations. A franchise owner is somewhat approximate, except they can do to a large extent whatever the fuck they want, as long as they turn in data that matches a proposal, and follow some regulations. It’s a completely idiotic system, and it is rife with exploitation and corruption. They’re pretty much always classified as professors and are usually veterans in the field. “Professor” is a deceptive title. They probably don’t teach, and there’s certainly no expectation that they teach even remotely decently. But if we called them lab franchisees, the public would get suspicious. Johnny Gradstudent, who’s paid in old pizza and loose change, can teach circles around most PI’s in a classroom setting. These are not usually the professors you had in undergrad, which were probably more full-time teachers. Although if you had a professor who couldn’t teach for shit, there’s a good chance he may have been a researcher. As professors, they are granted the authority to confer educational credentials, and this is an absolutely insane amount of power, and it’s pretty much completely unregulated. They get to dictate the terms of research to workers, and it’s take it or leave it. Oh, also, you ever wonder why the vast majority of research science seems to be done by Asian immigrants? Because Americans won’t put up with that shit. If you’re working at a university, you can stay in America. PI’s will absolutely use that as leverage. People will work in shit conditions if the alternative is being kicked out an into an even shittier country. The second we learn how to fast-track immigration for academic workers the system will shift. I don’t know how, but it will be messy, and I advocate for it.
So a company that makes chocolate milk decided to take advantage of the MIPS program. They talked to a PI about doing a study looking at how their milk helps athletes perform (channeling Gatorade and its creation at the University of Florida in the 60’s, perhaps). The committee report was boring, and I almost skipped it, but I’m glad I didn’t, because I would have missed the part where the company described as having “advantages over chocolate milk such as… essential electrolytes“. I laughed my ass off.
Paperwork was done, and all the money was filed into the completely legal channels into the university and the PI’s pockets. There are a million ways this can be done. One common way is by buying equipment and donating it to the university department, and the PI will likely be the head or a major player in the department anyway, so it’s essentially purchased equipment for them. The precise shuffling of funds is tedious, but all easily done legally, and the money can add up if a PI knows what they’re doing. This is completely, 100% normal, and it is going on all over the country at this very minute. It is not an anomaly, it is business as usual. Even the university committee report affirms that nothing was done in direct violation of policy.
The only damn thing that was different this time is that the people got suspicious because this was so conspicuously bullshit: the wife came home, opened the door and saw her husband going to town. The only people who didn’t notice this was a blatant scam were helpless simpletons like a school superintendent. The proposals recommended by the committee to remedy these types of events in the future amounted to double-checking paperwork, making sure everything is airtight, and maybe being slightly less blasé about pre-reviewed press releases. Universities send out press releases of unpublished material all the damn time, by the way. Go click through the sources at Science Daily and see how many of the stories are based on yet-unpublished material.
Oh, and they gave the money back. That’s the coup de grace. They returned the tainted money to the Sanhedrin. Unlike in the case of Judas Iscariot, we let them give it back. “Ah, we have cleansed ourselves of the evil money; now we are pure!” They’re hoping we’ll buy that bullshit. I’m begging you to flip over the tables in the temple. They are sinners because they took the money, and they shall remain sinners as they take more money next week.
They have not, and they will not repent their sins. What they did not and will not do is question how they get money in the first place. They will never consider aloud, “maybe we shouldn’t be taking money from private businesses at all”. They will never be terrified that such a grossly specious study ever got off the ground. They will never considered tossing their tenured PI out for giving the go-ahead for such nonsense. They will never wonder if it’s appropriate to have grad students, postdocs, volunteers, and immigrants working for under minimum wage churning out data to enrich a company who’s giving kickbacks to a PI in exchange for a stamp denoting “education” (by way of degrees or published papers).
The PI system will stand. The “peer” review paper publishing system as the basis of academic prestige wills stand. Private corporate gain on the backs of the taxpayer will stand. They can tweak all the paperwork and run all the COI classes they want, they’re not doing a goddamn thing about the real shit that’s poisoning academia.
This time it was chocolate milk. Because this was an easy catch. No shit chocolate milk doesn’t cure concussions. So how the fuck are you going to catch this kind of bullshit when the study is written about something way more obscure? Peer review, the process whereby the same people in this corrupt system grade the other people in the system by their own caprice? Shit slips passed that gate all the time. And review is an end-of-the-line process. We’re letting too much crap off the ground. The same system that green-lights a company to run some bullshit chocolate milk study is the same system in charge of a huge segment of our nation’s modern medical research.
We should be mortified.