3 ms·

Read linked article, offensive language was used AFTER they refused to provide raw data. It took lawsuit to get them.

• frankquist 10y ago
  Context was not provided however - an article that calls researchers bimbos is not one I take on its word. Was the raw data refused? And why was it refused? Perhaps because they were, as the original article states, prepping the study for publication, or because they had put it on hold? Or because they put the paper on hold and wanted to focus on doublechecking it before spending work on making the data available? Perhaps they still had to retrieve the rights to publish the data, or find a way to publish it in a good way? Context is lacking to state that there was a non-benign refusal of data.
• dalke 10y ago
  I read the article. I saw nothing about a lawsuit. I also read that the final paper wasn't published until very recently. Why should a research group be forced to distribute raw data years before the paper is finished? In the US, for example, http://biotech.law.lsu.edu/IEEE/ieee36.htm http://biotech.law.lsu.edu/IEEE/ieee36.htm says "The term, Research Data, is defined as the recorded factual material commonly accepted in the scientific community as necessary to validate research findings. It does not include: preliminary analyses, drafts of scientific papers, ... " I know nothing about the Australian equivalent.
  • jkot 10y ago
    Paper was published first time several years ago. Lawsuit is mentioned in other article.
• deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]