Sorry for the miscommunication. I was trying to give biomed an easier hurdle to surmount (reproducible at least in principle), not change the subject. Your rea

Sorry for the miscommunication. I was trying to give biomed an easier hurdle to surmount (reproducible at least in principle), not change the subject. Your reading of the paper did not make sense to me, so lets figure that out first. You wrote: "This editorial is about making it so that preclinical publications are only published when they're ready for the clinic." To me, the problems identified and suggestions provided by Begley and Ellis sound more like science 101 lessons rather than complaints about premature publication: "In studies for which findings could be reproduced, authors had paid close attention to controls, reagents, investigator bias and describing the complete data set. For results that could not be reproduced, however, data were not routinely analysed by investigators blinded to the experimental versus control groups. Investigators frequently presented the results of one experiment, such as a single Western-blot analysis. They sometimes said they presented specific experiments that supported their underlying hypothesis, but that were not reflective of the entire data set. There are no guidelines that require all data sets to be reported in a paper; often, original data are removed during the peer review and publication process. [...] As with clinical studies, preclinical investigators should be blinded to the control and treatment arms, and use only rigorously validated reagents. All experiments should include and show appropriate positive and negative controls. Critical experiments should be repeated, preferably by different investigators in the same lab, and the entire data set must be represented in the final publication. For example, showing data from tumour models in which a drug is inactive, and may not completely fit an original hypothesis, is just as important as showing models in which the hypothesis was confirmed." So why have we been able to interpret the meaning of these words so differently?