3 ms·
> I asked her why, and she said that if she published the results she would not be likely to ever receive funding from the company again. Yeah, this is why is
by lomnakkus 9y ago
> I asked her why, and she said that if she published the results she would not be likely to ever receive funding from the company again.
Yeah, this is why is absolutely paramount that we should push for all research studies[1] to be disclosed to the public before actually conducting the research. For example, in the medical realm see http://policyaudit.alltrials.net/ http://policyaudit.alltrials.net/
[1] Or, rather, not take studies that haven't been pre-disclosed seriously. I have very little hope that this type of policy will become pervasive enough for all types of study, but medical research affects human lives so there's at least a little hope that it will become a government-mandated requirement for drugs that need approval.
- mmirate 9y agoWhat is to ensure that a study which is being "pre-disclosed" has not, in fact, already had the data collected and simply being withheld for the same amount of time that it took to collect?
- tstactplsignore 9y agoThis just really doesn't make sense for a lot of research. Most science isn't this kind of "Does chemical X do Y?"- these kind of clinical trials and safety reviews are not really what most scientists are engaged in. There could be some centralized system (do you know that clinicaltrials.gov already exists and does this for pharmaceutical research?) for safety and efficacy experiments, but most science goes more like "let's figure out how the heck this thing works!" and are an investigation involving hundreds of constantly changing mini-experiments that'd be impossible and counterproductive to predict beforehand.