#scientific-integrity

#scientific-integrity

The executive order promises to ensure that "federal decisions are informed by the most credible, reliable, and impartial scientific evidence available." In practice, however, it gives political appointees authority to define scientific integrity and decide which evidence counts and how it should be interpreted.

The FAIR principles have transformed the scientific landscape by ensuring that data is findable, accessible, interoperable, and reusable, thereby enhancing the integrity of research.

We try to point out those bad papers because we still believe in science and want to make science better. But, I am very worried about how the work we do in pointing out bad papers is currently being misused, or even weaponized, to convince the general public that all science is bad.

This order promises a commitment to federally funded research that is transparent, rigorous, and impactful, but risks undermining scientific independence by politicizing research evaluation.

We're probably going to stop publishing in The Lancet, New England Journal of Medicine, JAMA, and those other journals because they're all corrupt.

Imagine you're trying to pass an exam that has a particular pass rate, and you add as many questions as you want. You see which ones you got right, and you remove the ones that you got wrong. That's basically what they're doing.

The acting U.S. attorney's letter to CHEST represents an alarming trend towards authoritarianism in science, signaling a government attempt to control research and media.

"When you start out, you think you're the one who's stupid. But after ten years in science, you realize, okay, now I'm an expert and I still don't understand some of these figures."

In the original version of this article, there was an error in Fig. 5b, where the -actin blot for 293T cells was inadvertently duplicated in the MCF7 panel.