No, I explained that in one of the articles you probably read. Natural scientists face less political temptations because their subject matters aren't social, so there's little political debate about their models. There's plenty of intellectual debate, but it's not so political (although the overreach of wokeness is an exception that proves the rule), and there's not a lot of money being spent on the scientist's politics. The money depends only on whether the science works, on its results. In economics, you can get paid to be a partisan hack.

You can restrict your view of economics, if you like. It has no bearing on my argument, which is about the whole industry of economics, the one that includes the revolving door, the think tanks, the consultancies, etc. But you can pretend the Ivory Tower is inviolate, if you like.