For instance, AIDS cocktails (as well as nearly all other drugs we may make use of) have been invented & marketed by corporations, drawing upon research subsidized by capitalist states. Corporations have primary interest in making profits & capitalist states have primary interest in supporting the conditions of capital accumulation. Does that mean we should reject AIDS cocktails (and other drugs that have been found beneficial sometimes) as hopelessly "bourgeois" & therefore necessarily harmful? Your doctor has an interest in getting money from you or your insurance company or the state. Does it necessarily make his or her diagnosis, prescription, etc. always wrong, since s/he is "petty-bourgeois," interested in money-making?
We are not against effective knowledges that have been produced by scientists, nearly all of whom have been either directly or indirectly employed by corporations or capitalist states; we are against intellectual properties & the capitalist system of production that make only the privileged few beneficiaries of science. The distinction is crucial.
Yoshie