Taking Ownership and Responsibility of Scientific Whims

[parsley]

I'll do one at a time charliep, because I have company coming for lunch and because agstar demands I wean from verbosity.

Scietists have a duty of care because they are the specialists. Making a roto-propeller from recycled metal may be cheaper, but dangerous. It is up to him to underline that risk. Lead in crib paint.

Toyota KNEW exactly where the harm lay but thought they wouldn't get caught. ie charliep shouldn't be responsible for the factory flawed Lexus he purchased.
The courts agree. pars

[charliep]

Your examples are poor decisions in the production process and not scientific
advancement. I suspect science in both cases might have told the companies
this is a bad idea.

the discussion will likely come to what type of processes encourage R. and D.
on the one hand and protect societal good on the other. What level of
government regulation? What cost of meeting regulatory requirements?
Legal remedies? Cost to manage this? International agreements on approval
processes and tolerances.

[parsley]

Scientific information used in the processes should be available for and subject to inspection.

Knowingly hiding information or keeping quiet is professionally wrong.

It's why policy makers must understand and consider the issue of moral ethics; maybe we should back up a bit?

Scientists who close their eyes are of no use to safety/right and wrong are they? Pars