Wednesday, January 24, 2007

My reponse to Richard Lupton's letter in today's Dispatch

note: I typically do not respond in-kind, though more must be said to clarify this matter.


Dear Editor:

In his response to my letter regarding the January 10, 2007 Dispatch article on the OSU Office for Technology Licensing, "Ohio State research is a losing proposition," Richard Lupton misses the point of the whole story. The only product of value mentioned was the small-child immobilization collar developed and brought to market without OSU assistance by the talents and efforts of entrepreneur, Marie Robinette; no state or federal tax dollars required.

Lupton implies that I would have desired more research dollars spent at OSU should one of my family members become ill in the future. According to the list of products coming out of the decades of discovery at OSU, I would only have benefited from the OSU research during the past ten years if my family members suffered from heartworms, got lost on Mars, or were in desperate need of tofu soybeans.

In the real world, it's entrepreneurs such as Bill Gate, Steve Jobs, and now Marie Robinette who bring needed products to market, while at the same time, OSU research wastes billions of hard-earned tax dollars, yielding no benefit.

Jim Fedako

No comments: