This administration is pushing anti-science as a whole which is going to do irreparable harm to all well meaning scientists and those interested in these fields as a whole. And in the end the ones suffering will be us for years to come as we will have effectively stifled innovation, especially when it comes to health.
I recall reading about journal’s positive bias to only publish positive results of pharmaceutical drugs, but would not publish negative results in later years (when another researcher disproves it). This is bad science and bad for patients. This in addition to the downright fraud.
I’m not a fan of this secretary’s approaches, but I’ve been hoping for 10 years someone would take a stand against predatory journal practices
Nature is literally the worlds top scientific journal. This action by RFK/HHS is not in good faith.
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?"
But that's not today's question.
Where is power, agency, missing for the RFK's of the world? Call that X. Ideally RFK would telescope symbolism there.
Presumably he forgot X, isn't invited to X, can't win with X, or can't reason with X.
As a result nature and science/policy based human health is temporarily buggered by same.
>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.
"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.
passwordoops•10h ago
However this is not the way to go about fixing it
WaxProlix•10h ago
This pattern is pretty common when you look for it.
ethan_smith•9h ago
derbOac•5h ago
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.
derbOac•6h ago
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.