Reminds me of a summarizing joke: if you took all the economists in the world and laid them end to end, they still wouldn't reach a conclusion.
More prosaically, I'm reminded of Lee Smolin's "The Trouble With Physics" -- highly recommended even if there may be a fly or two in his own "ointment".
i'm not sure you mean "sadly" those days are over; but perhaps you mean sadly there is the necessity for this oversite which may or may not be perfectly tailored but is brought on by the unresponsive status quo?
I remember working on chemfinder at Paratek (Nuzyra). I came up with a way to link NMR and LCMS data to the compound library. This made the chemists very angry, they didn't like the fact anyone could see the quality of their work all of a sudden.
Check out Swamananthin review Omadacycline (Nuzyra), "non inferiority" studies, sorry Evan, enjoy your holidays?
All western, northern, southern and far-eastern blots should have the original, unenhanced image submitted with the edited image. Ditto for confocal microscopic images and all fluorescent microscopy images. Some journals require this but many do not. With digital submissions, this should be easy to do. All statistical analyses should be required to submit their raw data. Transparency is easy if you have nothing to hide.
Raw data should be fully accessible. If that incites more fraud then it just shows how deep the rot goes. Clean the slate!
Excellent post. The closing paragraph summed it up.
Marvelous article, Vinay. We can only hope that reform is coming.
Byzantine, broken and inefficient. Amen! #Reform the science
👍👌😉🙂
Reminds me of a summarizing joke: if you took all the economists in the world and laid them end to end, they still wouldn't reach a conclusion.
More prosaically, I'm reminded of Lee Smolin's "The Trouble With Physics" -- highly recommended even if there may be a fly or two in his own "ointment".
i'm not sure you mean "sadly" those days are over; but perhaps you mean sadly there is the necessity for this oversite which may or may not be perfectly tailored but is brought on by the unresponsive status quo?
Research parasites? Because people want to confirm studies? Does the NEJM ***know*** they are publishing false or lousy research? Why so prickly?
Actually, bedlam is coming.
I remember working on chemfinder at Paratek (Nuzyra). I came up with a way to link NMR and LCMS data to the compound library. This made the chemists very angry, they didn't like the fact anyone could see the quality of their work all of a sudden.
Check out Swamananthin review Omadacycline (Nuzyra), "non inferiority" studies, sorry Evan, enjoy your holidays?
https://epmonthly.com/article/omadacycline-nejm-and-non-inferiority-studies/
All western, northern, southern and far-eastern blots should have the original, unenhanced image submitted with the edited image. Ditto for confocal microscopic images and all fluorescent microscopy images. Some journals require this but many do not. With digital submissions, this should be easy to do. All statistical analyses should be required to submit their raw data. Transparency is easy if you have nothing to hide.
Should the editor of NEJM, the journal that published vaccine RCTs, but not raw data, also be on the VRBPAC?