3 ms·

I think in some of those cases you have conclusions drawn from raw data that could be replicated or reviewed. For example many teams use the same raw data from

I think in some of those cases you have conclusions drawn from raw data that could be replicated or reviewed. For example many teams use the same raw data from Large Colliders, or JWT, or other large science projects to reach competiting conclusions. Yes in a perfect world we would also replicate the data collection but we do not live in a perfect world Same is true for Drug Trials, there is always a battle over getting the raw data from drug trails as the companies claim that data is trade secret, so independent verification of drug trails is very expensive but if the FDA required not just the release of redacted conclusions and supporting redacted data but 100% of all data gathered it would be alot better IMO For example the FDA says it will take decades to release the raw data from the COVID Vaccine trials.. Why... and that is after being forced to do so via a law suit.

eesmith 3y ago
> For example many teams use the same raw data from Large Colliders, or JWT, or other large science projects to reach competiting conclusions. Yes, but why must the first team wait until the second is finished before publishing? What if you are the only person in the world with expertise in the fossil record of an obscure branch of snails? You spend 10 years developing a paper knowing that the next person with the right training to replicate the work might not even be born yet. Other paleontologists might not be able to replicate the work, but still tell if it's publishable - that's what they do now, yes? > but we do not live in a perfect world Alternatively, we don't live in a perfect world which is why we have the current system instead of requiring replication first. Since the same logic works for both cases, I don't think it's persuasive logic. > the FDA says it will take decades Well, that's a tangent. The FDA is charged with protecting and promoting public health, not improving the state of scholarly literature. And the FDA is only one of many public health organizations which carried out COVID vaccine trials.

eesmith 3y ago

> For example many teams use the same raw data from Large Colliders, or JWT, or other large science projects to reach competiting conclusions. Yes, but why must the first team wait until the second is finished before publishing? What if you are the only person in the world with expertise in the fossil record of an obscure branch of snails? You spend 10 years developing a paper knowing that the next person with the right training to replicate the work might not even be born yet. Other paleontologists might not be able to replicate the work, but still tell if it's publishable - that's what they do now, yes? > but we do not live in a perfect world Alternatively, we don't live in a perfect world which is why we have the current system instead of requiring replication first. Since the same logic works for both cases, I don't think it's persuasive logic. > the FDA says it will take decades Well, that's a tangent. The FDA is charged with protecting and promoting public health, not improving the state of scholarly literature. And the FDA is only one of many public health organizations which carried out COVID vaccine trials.