[flagged]
RFK Jr.'s health department calls Nature "junk science," cancels subscriptions
11–20 of 29 posts
Re: RFK Jr.'s health department calls Nature "junk science," cancels subscriptions
#12talk about throwing the baby out with the bath water....
Re: RFK Jr.'s health department calls Nature "junk science," cancels subscriptions
#13While I do agree that there are some academic journals that publish studies that are probably a bit suspicious, given there has been proof of enough high profile researchers publishing using false or fabricated data, though I'm not sure about this particular one to be fair - I do not like the against science as a whole messaging. This administration is pushing anti-science as a whole which is going to do irreparable…
> some academic journals that publish studies that are probably a bit suspicious, [...], though I'm not sure about this particular one to be fair
Nature is literally the worlds top scientific journal. This action by RFK/HHS is not in good faith.
Re: RFK Jr.'s health department calls Nature "junk science," cancels subscriptions
#14[flagged]
> I love Nature's articles, but people won't forget what happened during COVID.
And what does what happened during COVID have to do with Nature?
Re: RFK Jr.'s health department calls Nature "junk science," cancels subscriptions
#15Re: RFK Jr.'s health department calls Nature "junk science," cancels subscriptions
#16https://duckduckgo.com/?t=ffab&q=Springer+Nature&ia=web
>Springer Nature is a leading publisher of books, journals, and other materials for researchers across disciplines and regions. Learn about its initiatives, partnerships, and platforms for open science, women in science, SDGs, DEI, and more.
and yeah, the thing looks exactly as you'd expect it to look.
Re: RFK Jr.'s health department calls Nature "junk science," cancels subscriptions
#17While I do agree that there are some academic journals that publish studies that are probably a bit suspicious, given there has been proof of enough high profile researchers publishing using false or fabricated data, though I'm not sure about this particular one to be fair - I do not like the against science as a whole messaging. This administration is pushing anti-science as a whole which is going to do irreparable…
"Pro-Science" and "Anti-Science" is too blunt of an instrument. It doesn't distinguish between the scientific method, journals, and institutions.
If someone has the opinion that the scientific method is great, but the current incentives at journals and institutions lead to poor practice of it too often, is that "anti-science?"
Re: RFK Jr.'s health department calls Nature "junk science," cancels subscriptions
#18This is the most problematic part to me:
"He went on to say that "unless these journals change dramatically," the federal government would "stop NIH scientists from publishing there" and create "in-house" journals instead."
This isn't about Nature. It's about the idea of subjecting your research to outside peer review of any kind. They're objecting to the idea of submitting their research to any outside standards.
Re: RFK Jr.'s health department calls Nature "junk science," cancels subscriptions
#19What I hate is there is an issue with the way big academic research is done. Anyone involved has to have seen at the very least cherry-picking all the way to outright fraud. Has been for probably 30 years. However this is not the way to go about fixing it
> Anyone involved has to have seen at the very least cherry-picking all the way to outright fraud. Has been for probably 30 years.
I had to read up to your first sentence to figure out if you were talking about some of RFK's vaccine advisors or someone else.
Re: RFK Jr.'s health department calls Nature "junk science," cancels subscriptions
#20What I hate is there is an issue with the way big academic research is done. Anyone involved has to have seen at the very least cherry-picking all the way to outright fraud. Has been for probably 30 years. However this is not the way to go about fixing it
The solution is stronger pre-registration requirements, open data mandates, and funding replication studies - not politically-motivated journal cancellations that cut researchers off from the very information needed to advance knowledge.
This is the thing: if RFK Jr were acting in good faith, and this had anything to do with a serious interest in scientific integrity rather than avoiding scrutiny of his antivax conspiracies, he would be setting rigorous standards and then directing NIH to meet those standards.
Cutting off access to journals for vague unspecified vilifying reasons doesn't increase integrity.
This is a preemptive action aiming to justify why they don't have to subject an upcoming deluge of junk research to rigorous review. It's the MO of this administration: discredit investigatory transparency bodies, and then engage in unethical behavior that would be subject to investigation by those bodies. Foxes running the henhouses, etc.