Naturalproductman’s Blog

Hey, is that a natural product?!

Archive for the ‘Ethics’ Category

A little on research ethics

Posted by naturalproductman on April 4, 2016

Just thought I’d note some interesting articles about research ethics.

 

NIEHS – I like the note about honesty: “Do not fabricate, falsify, or misrepresent data. Do not deceive colleagues, research sponsors, or the public” says David B. Resnik, bioethicist and NIEHS IRB Chair.

From Elsevier – “avoid the trap of becoming too upset by misbehaving authors” says Ben Martin, editor of Research Policy, because they will inevitably be out there – the pressure to publish has unfortunately made people want to publish more than just being honest and publishing with integrity.

Posted in Ethics | Leave a Comment »

Journal of Irreproducibility

Posted by naturalproductman on March 7, 2016

There’s a new journal on irreproducible results. I guess this used to be a joke but now it’s real.

I wonder if they will have some organic synthesis journal articles here as we know about some cases of irreproducible chemical reactions.

Science introduction

Preclinical Reproducibility and Robustness

Posted in Ethics, Random | Leave a Comment »

Difference in media response

Posted by naturalproductman on December 10, 2014

I just thought I’d point some difference in responses between two recent retractions in Science vs. Nature.

There were two Nature papers recently retracted on stem cells from a group in RIKEN and it was all over the news in Japan.

On the other hand there was a Science paper recently retracted on a retro-“click” reaction reported by a group at the University of Texas, which was covered in C&E News.

Because I have been in both countries during the time these retractions occurred, I just thought I’d point out an interesting difference in response by the media (news coverage).

I remember being in Japan around January 2014 and turning on the news on the television and seeing a woman with a face full of tears at a press conference on almost every channel they showed the news. I wondered what it was about, and it was something about making mature cells into stem cells by treating them with acid. It was a big deal and a topic of discussion in probably every news show as well as of course your science news and blogs on the internet.

Meanwhile in the US, I don’t recall as much of the time when I heard about the Science retraction (looking back, it was around June 2014) but I remember seeing C&E News and other blogs (retractionwatch, pipeline corante) about the retraction in the US lab. The article was about reversing the click reaction (azide and alkyne coupling to make a triazole, and the paper was about doing the reverse reaction). I don’t think I have to be a science expert but it wasn’t as much of a big deal in the media – although still a serious debate about falsifying data and getting it published. I don’t remember seeing this story on the television.

I was just wondering, if the research was happening in the opposite countries (stem cell research in US and reverse click reaction in Japan), would a retro-click retraction of a Science paper be as big of a deal in Japan? And the other question: would a stem cell Nature paper retraction be as big of a deal in the US? Is it a difference between: (1) the importance of science in the media in the two countries, (2) the importance of the research areas (stem cell vs. basic science), (3) the genders of the lead authors (male vs. female), (4) a Science paper vs. 2 Nature papers, (5) a combination of all of the above, or (6) something else I did not mention?

Posted in Ethics, Random | 2 Comments »

Altmetric Score

Posted by naturalproductman on July 22, 2013

Anyone notice something new on ACIE abstracts?  They have this thing called the altmetric score where they count how many times people tweet about the articles or post on facebook or mention on Google+.

 

Am score

Posted in Ethics, Random | Leave a Comment »

Relevance and Design (Conception) are important to publish in ACIE

Posted by naturalproductman on July 22, 2013

An interesting study was done on rejected manuscripts from ACIE by Lutz Bornmann and co-workers at ETH Zurich.

They concluded that the “relevance of contribution” (i.e. “future gain” that comes from the publication) and “design/conception” (i.e. reproducibility, design of research experiments) are important factors that led to a rejected paper from ACIE to be published in another high impact journal.

Scientometrics paper

Posted in Ethics, Random | Leave a Comment »