University funding

User avatar
MikeAustin
Posts: 1032
Joined: Thu Aug 27, 2020 2:27 pm

University funding

Post by MikeAustin »

Why do so very few university academics speak out against the fake science of SAGE? They are silent, either voluntarily or at the behest of their university. It doesn't take much to guess that loss of funding is the main fear. So how much funding might that be?

I have been looking at the grants that are handed out by the Welcome Trust who are one of the major players. Essentially, the Trust emerged from the pharmaceutical business, sold off to GlaxoSmithKline - a company they still work with. The list of their grants is available here. I have used it to extract the following figures.

Let's have a look at the UK grants, and how much goes to universities:
welcome-1.jpg
welcome-1.jpg (42.21 KiB) Viewed 39 times
Universities get over 2/3 of the grants totalling £5.2bn over 15 years.

Let's see how much is spent on grants for epidemiology and vaccines:
welcome-2.jpg
welcome-2.jpg (43.47 KiB) Viewed 39 times
Over 15 years, it has been £911m, which is 17.6% of the universities' total.

Some universities get more than others. Here's a few for example:
welcome-3.jpg
welcome-3.jpg (42.69 KiB) Viewed 39 times
Oxford University gets nearly 1/4 of grants for epidemiology and vaccines. Imperial College London, notorious for Neil Ferguson's models, got a total of £424m over 15 years, £80m of which was for epidemiology and vaccines. Neil Ferguson's name was on successful applications totalling £2.5m in 2018/19, although 'only' £919,000 was for a study of virus transmission. As I reported here, Imperial College get much more from the Billy Goat's Foundation.

Of course, there are many other sources of funding for universities, but organisations such as Welcome Trust tend to give grants for research and postgraduate work. This supports the livelihood of the higher echelons of academia and allows such work to be continued year on year.

Apart from risking grants specifically for subjects connected to the so-called pandemic, if academics were to speak out too much, it could jeopardise funding for other areas. This would make them unpopular in the university. Eminent authorities such as Mike Yeadon are not tied in this way. They can speak freely, as he says in that video.

I don't wish to single out university academics, but I imagine that many professionals find themselves in a similar situation and unable to speak out or blow the whistle. I hear that the doctors who are in the General Medical Council are forbidden to speak in opposition to government policy.

When/if we get out of this government-backed fraud, we will need to take a long, hard look at the funding of universities and the control of professional bodies. If vested interests had been properly addressed a long time ago, such a fraud would have been impossible.