What #Stand Up for Science Rallies Don't Stand Up for

5 times when Science didn't stand up

Stand up for science protests occurred in many major metropolitan areas yesterday. Researchers argue against cuts to indirect funding, and a perception that there may be more scrutiny to come. I am confident that science is the best path forward and that societal investments in research are valuable, at the same time, anyone who is familiar with universities must admit the current process is byzantine, broken, and inefficient. It craves reform.

It is easy to protest to defend your own salary, but I wonder why no one stood up for any of the following 5 topics in the last few years

1. The majority of science is conceptually flawed, does not reproduce, is not useful. Multiple empirical and theoretical analyses show this rate is upwards of 50%. Ioannidis showed with conservative modeling the majority of research is false. Glenn Begley reported Amgen’s experience where only 11%! of published cancer research could replicate in their lab

Not a single American university has sampled their own experiments and sought to replicate them. The NIH has never made reproducibility a cornerstone of funding. No one stood up for reproducible science.

2. Fraud is rarer, and involves willful deception. Its is often overlooked by scientists. To my knowledge, not a single one of these Dana Farber investigators have faced penalty for this. No one stood up for science free of photoshopped figures.

And, if you really wanted to eliminate all fraud you would realize that the only reason we find problems in images is people report the raw data. If we reported the raw data for all experiments, fraud would grow exponentially. Again, no one does that. Which brings me to….

3. When many of us concerned with the veracity of science asked for data sharing the Editor in Chief of NEJM called us “research parasites”— that’s the word used for someone who wants to make sure the published work is correct. Interestingly patients who participate in these studies wrongly assume the data will be shared for maximum good. Instead, because researchers want to hide data, the ICMJE’s proposal for data sharing was defeated. No one stood up for transparent science.

4. These professors were fired for not getting a covid vaccine AFTER they already had covid. Interestingly, many other professors got exemptions, but they did not. It is almost as if the mandate could be used to cull professors with unpopular views with selective exemption. No one stood up for these scientists, or a culture where we don’t fire people with unethical mandates. Aaron ironically was the hospitals medical ethicist.

   

5. Scientists are happy to protest their own funding, but most had nothing to say when schools were closed for 2 years, and people were separated from their dying loved ones. Both of these devastating actions went against science. Easy to stand up for science when it benefits you, harder to when it benefits others.

Stand up for science is not about standing up for scientific claims or processes; it is about standing up to unaccountable funding. Sadly, those days are over. Reform is coming.