> that has little to do with the actual science of diabetes

Not the takeaway I got from the article. They describe specific research and specific dollar-drawdown amounts.

The tools of science are just as relevant as the science per se to the process of science. I may be extrapolating from the astronomical circles I’m more familiar with. But folks debating telescopes and whatnot is commonplace, political, and absolutely germane. In many of those cases, simply handing out an editorial wasn’t the norm—you’d have straight-up advocacy going on. The idea that a conference organizer would eject someone for distributing a published paper would be absurd.

> likely that the conference organisers want to encourage technical discussion in a polite low-politics environment

They invited a political appointee to speak!

> They invited a political appointee to speak!

And it appears that is about their limit for politics at the event. They put their foot down at letting it turn into a debate club.

I suspect if Bhattacharya didn't control the purse strings somehow he wouldn't have been invited to talk politics either, I bet the organisers were gritting their teeth when they offered him a slot. And nothing short of a significant cash infusion being involved would have induced them to let him speak. This appears to be a technical conference.