Hi everyone, I'm new to this group, but I had an idea that I would like
some feedback on. The recent headlines have been littered with
scientists getting caught publishing falsified data. Ranging from
clinical studies where doctors contrive entire data sets, to the more
significant reports coming in from South Korea regarding human stem
cell cloning. Japanese students recently exposed a professor who
studied RNAi, and found evidence that his data was falsified as well.
These stories got me to thinking -- who is monitoring science?
The American public is already wary of science, and scientific 'public
relations' is lacking. The current administration in the White House
is not pro-science, and has been accused of using research findings out
of context for political gain. And now that word is spreading that
scientists frequently fabricate data, well, the overall trend do not
look good.
The peer review process, in an ideal world, works. Unfortunately, many
researchers are so busy running their labs, worrying about grant
deadlines and paper submissions, that the peer review process may not
work as well as it should. In addition, most research publications
include data from experiments that, for the most part, will likely
never be repeated again under the precise conditions they were done
originally. The exceptions to this are limited to those performing
research that depends directly on the success of these previous
experiments. Many research findings are thus taken on 'faith' in a
way.
Most of the time, this works amazingly well; recent advances in
molecular biology research have been nothing short of amazing. If
something turns out to be incorrect, we have no problem publishing
counter claims or corrections. Most scientists are honest about their
work, and let their egos take a backseat to the truth.
It's the few that do not that gives the system problems.
It might be time for the creation of an independent entity that
investigates such situations. A sort of "science" police. The quality
of research, and public opinion, must not be allowed to continue along
its current downward spiral; the vast majority of research funding is
through government programs -- funding that is in part related to
public opinion.
I for one would be interested in a sort of 'detective' job that
pertains to this kind of situation. At the very least, I would like to
get the ball rolling on this topic, and hear from people who are much
more knowledgable than myself.
What do people think?
