The term scientific method is a phrase used to market research. The essential premise in the narrative of the scientific method is adopting an open mind. This is a laudable goal but also elusive. The impetus for any experiment is to drive an argument to the benefit of whoever invests in the effort and expense. This does not mean that scientists are evil. Anyone who is alive has to make a living. We don’t fault people who work and are paid to do a job that they wouldn’t do if not for the need to pay the rent etc. The scientists who survive as scientists do what they need to to survive. If they don’t they will not be scientists active in research. Even if we heard their opinions in the past we don’t hear them anymore. Research is always biased.
Conflict of Interest has multiple sources. The usual disclosure is not enlightening.
Unfortunately the method for answering any significant question is debate. A party to one side of the issue is opposed by a party on the other side. This is politics and any question of significance is decided this way. There is nothing right or correct about what is decided. Using a jury does not help the goal of truth in science. Consensus is not science. The truth lies in the physics, chemistry and anatomy of a subject and the internal consistency of an argument. You can work with consensus which is politics, but you can’t trust it.
Evidence is obtained when a scientist wants to argue a point of view. A scientist could obtain evidence to answer a question but the choosing and formulation of the question reflects bias. Why are they asking this? If we obtain evidence and we don’t like the answer then we don’t talk about it. Scientists might have altruistic intentions but they don’t have the time or the money to. They could if there was free lunch, but there is no free lunch. Truth depends not on evidence but on the internal consistency of the argument. Evidence is biased and all men are biased.
.