2 ms·
The notion of a central registry and government regulation for science is horrific and backwards no matter what the initial intention is. Why not a distributed,
by diminish 15y ago
The notion of a central registry and government regulation for science is horrific and backwards no matter what the initial intention is. Why not a distributed, peer-to-peer approach for scientific publishing where all articles are anonymously accessed and linked to each other?
- pessimizer 15y agoBecause that, in no way, will prevent researchers from trashing studies until they get the results they want, or fishing for any significant correlation after the fact as if that's what they were looking for all along. Some sort of validation mark that a study announced itself before being started would at least show me which ones I should ignore - because IMO this type of thing is ruining medicine, esp. pharma. At this point, there's very little evidence that some major drugs, classes of drugs, and treatments work at all, and that's both scary and a systemic financial drain.