3 ms·

I have to say, I don't really understand your criticisms as you've presented them, perhaps I'm missing something. The "brainy mice" are pretty clearly the ones

I have to say, I don't really understand your criticisms as you've presented them, perhaps I'm missing something. The "brainy mice" are pretty clearly the ones with the inhibited PDE4B enzyme. What is it you're mocking here, the use of the buzzwordy phrase? > at least make the primary source available. They give the contact information of the researcher and cite the paper, mentioning that it is available upon request. How does its open availability fall under the responsibility of the journalist?

dluan 11y ago
What bothers me about lazy science communication is that it assumes the reader is dumb. It assumes that the reader won't desire to know the inefficient details, or the context, or why the scientist chose one approach over another. It assumes that I'm incapable of coming to my own conclusions. Sure, PDE4B-inhibited mice might be less scared than cats, and sure, even if it's p-hacking I'll let that statement fly. But you know what other ways you can get mice to be less scared of cats? Brain parasites. Sleep deprivation. Probably meth or something like that. Or, I'm sure there's other genes that knock out fear. But they probably also knock out teeth. The point is that if the goal of the outreach is understanding, it doesn't provide the tools for the context of that understanding. A link to the paper is one such tool. Infographics, video interviews, lab protocols, primary observations, and source code are all valuable tools that help achieve this goal.