Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Caveat lector

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Caveat lector

    Those of us who offer links to scientific papers should do so with caution given that none of us are qualified experts in any those various fields.

    The following is an article from the beginning of February but one which has some exceedingly worrying implications.


    https://www.theguardian.com/science/...o-crisis-point

    The situation has become appalling’: fake scientific papers push research credibility to crisis point

    Last year, 10,000 sham papers had to be retracted by academic journals, but experts think this is just the tip of the iceberg

    Tens of thousands of bogus research papers are being published in journals in an international scandal that is worsening every year, scientists have warned. Medical research is being compromised, drug development hindered and promising academic research jeopardised thanks to a global wave of sham science that is sweeping laboratories and universities.

    Last year the annual number of papers retracted by research journals topped 10,000 for the first time. Most analysts believe the figure is only the tip of an iceberg of scientific fraud.

    “The situation has become appalling,” said Professor Dorothy Bishop of Oxford University. “The level of publishing of fraudulent papers is creating serious problems for science. In many fields it is becoming difficult to build up a cumulative approach to a subject, because we lack a solid foundation of trustworthy findings. And it’s getting worse and worse.”

    The startling rise in the publication of sham science papers has its roots in China, where young doctors and scientists seeking promotion were required to have published scientific papers. Shadow organisations – known as “paper mills” – began to supply fabricated work for publication in journals there.

    The practice has since spread to India, Iran, Russia, former Soviet Union states and eastern Europe, with paper mills supplying ­fabricated studies to more and more journals as increasing numbers of young ­scientists try to boost their careers by claiming false research experience. In some cases, journal editors have been bribed to accept articles, while paper mills have managed to establish their own agents as guest editors who then allow reams of ­falsified work to be published.

    “Editors are not fulfilling their roles properly, and peer reviewers are not doing their jobs. And some are being paid large sums of money,” said Professor Alison Avenell of Aberdeen University. “It is deeply worrying.”

    The products of paper mills often look like regular articles but are based on templates in which names of genes or diseases are slotted in at random among fictitious tables and figures. Worryingly, these articles can then get incorporated into large databases used by those working on drug discovery.

    Others are more bizarre and include research unrelated to a journal’s field, making it clear that no peer review has taken place in relation to that article. An example is a paper on Marxist ideology that appeared in the journal Computational and Mathematical Methods in Medicine. Others are distinctive because of the strange language they use, including references to “bosom peril” rather than breast cancer and “Parkinson’s ailment” rather Parkinson’s disease.

    Watchdog groups – such as Retraction Watch – have tracked the problem and have noted retractions by journals that were forced to act on occasions when fabrications were uncovered. One study, by Nature, revealed that in 2013 there were just over 1,000 retractions. In 2022, the figure topped 4,000 before jumping to more than 10,000 last year.

    Of this last total, more than 8,000 retracted papers had been published in journals owned by Hindawi, a subsidiary of the publisher Wiley, figures that have now forced the company to act. “We will be sunsetting the Hindawi brand and have begun to fully integrate the 200-plus Hindawi journals into Wiley’s ­portfolio,” a Wiley spokesperson told the Observer.

    The spokesperson added that Wiley had now identified hundreds of fraudsters present in its portfolio of journals, as well as those who had held guest editorial roles. “We have removed them from our systems and will continue to take a proactive … approach in our efforts to clean up the scholarly record, strengthen our integrity processes and contribute to cross-industry solutions.”

    But Wiley insisted it could not tackle the crisis on its own, a message echoed by other publishers, which say they are under siege from paper mills. Academics remain cautious, however. The problem is that in many countries, academics are paid according to the number of papers they have published.

    “If you have growing numbers of researchers who are being strongly incentivised to publish just for the sake of publishing, while we have a growing number of journals making money from publishing the resulting articles, you have a perfect storm,” said Professor Marcus Munafo of Bristol University. “That is exactly what we have now.”

    The harm done by publishing poor or fabricated research is demonstrated by the anti-parasite drug ivermectin. Early laboratory studies indicated it could be used to treat Covid-19 and it was hailed as a miracle drug. However, it was later found these studies showed clear evidence of fraud, and medical authorities have refused to back it as a treatment for Covid.

    “The trouble was, ivermectin was used by anti-vaxxers to say: ‘We don’t need vaccination because we have this wonder drug,’” said Jack Wilkinson at Manchester University. “But many of the trials that underpinned those claims were not authentic.”

    Wilkinson added that he and his colleagues were trying to develop protocols that researchers could apply to reveal the authenticity of studies that they might include in their own work. “Some great science came out during the pandemic, but there was an ocean of rubbish research too. We need ways to pinpoint poor data right from the start.”

    The danger posed by the rise of the paper mill and fraudulent research papers was also stressed by Professor Malcolm MacLeod of Edinburgh University. “If, as a scientist, I want to check all the papers about a particular drug that might target cancers or stroke cases, it is very hard for me to avoid those that are fabricated. Scientific knowledge is being polluted by made-up material. We are facing a crisis.”

    This point was backed by Bishop: “People are building careers on the back of this tidal wave of fraudulent science and could end up running scientific institutes and eventually be used by mainstream journals as reviewers and editors. Corruption is creeping into the system.”



    ETA

    The journal Science published an article on this trend in May 2023
    Last edited by Hypatia_Alexandria; 03-22-2024, 08:39 AM.
    "It ain't necessarily so
    The things that you're liable
    To read in the Bible
    It ain't necessarily so
    ."

    Sportin' Life
    Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

  • #2
    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
    Those of us who offer links to scientific papers should do so with caution given that none of us are qualified experts in any those various fields.

    The following is an article from the beginning of February but one which has some exceedingly worrying implications.


    https://www.theguardian.com/science/...o-crisis-point

    The situation has become appalling’: fake scientific papers push research credibility to crisis point

    Last year, 10,000 sham papers had to be retracted by academic journals, but experts think this is just the tip of the iceberg

    Tens of thousands of bogus research papers are being published in journals in an international scandal that is worsening every year, scientists have warned. Medical research is being compromised, drug development hindered and promising academic research jeopardised thanks to a global wave of sham science that is sweeping laboratories and universities.

    Last year the annual number of papers retracted by research journals topped 10,000 for the first time. Most analysts believe the figure is only the tip of an iceberg of scientific fraud.

    “The situation has become appalling,” said Professor Dorothy Bishop of Oxford University. “The level of publishing of fraudulent papers is creating serious problems for science. In many fields it is becoming difficult to build up a cumulative approach to a subject, because we lack a solid foundation of trustworthy findings. And it’s getting worse and worse.”

    The startling rise in the publication of sham science papers has its roots in China, where young doctors and scientists seeking promotion were required to have published scientific papers. Shadow organisations – known as “paper mills” – began to supply fabricated work for publication in journals there.

    The practice has since spread to India, Iran, Russia, former Soviet Union states and eastern Europe, with paper mills supplying ­fabricated studies to more and more journals as increasing numbers of young ­scientists try to boost their careers by claiming false research experience. In some cases, journal editors have been bribed to accept articles, while paper mills have managed to establish their own agents as guest editors who then allow reams of ­falsified work to be published.

    “Editors are not fulfilling their roles properly, and peer reviewers are not doing their jobs. And some are being paid large sums of money,” said Professor Alison Avenell of Aberdeen University. “It is deeply worrying.”

    The products of paper mills often look like regular articles but are based on templates in which names of genes or diseases are slotted in at random among fictitious tables and figures. Worryingly, these articles can then get incorporated into large databases used by those working on drug discovery.

    Others are more bizarre and include research unrelated to a journal’s field, making it clear that no peer review has taken place in relation to that article. An example is a paper on Marxist ideology that appeared in the journal Computational and Mathematical Methods in Medicine. Others are distinctive because of the strange language they use, including references to “bosom peril” rather than breast cancer and “Parkinson’s ailment” rather Parkinson’s disease.

    Watchdog groups – such as Retraction Watch – have tracked the problem and have noted retractions by journals that were forced to act on occasions when fabrications were uncovered. One study, by Nature, revealed that in 2013 there were just over 1,000 retractions. In 2022, the figure topped 4,000 before jumping to more than 10,000 last year.

    Of this last total, more than 8,000 retracted papers had been published in journals owned by Hindawi, a subsidiary of the publisher Wiley, figures that have now forced the company to act. “We will be sunsetting the Hindawi brand and have begun to fully integrate the 200-plus Hindawi journals into Wiley’s ­portfolio,” a Wiley spokesperson told the Observer.

    The spokesperson added that Wiley had now identified hundreds of fraudsters present in its portfolio of journals, as well as those who had held guest editorial roles. “We have removed them from our systems and will continue to take a proactive … approach in our efforts to clean up the scholarly record, strengthen our integrity processes and contribute to cross-industry solutions.”

    But Wiley insisted it could not tackle the crisis on its own, a message echoed by other publishers, which say they are under siege from paper mills. Academics remain cautious, however. The problem is that in many countries, academics are paid according to the number of papers they have published.

    “If you have growing numbers of researchers who are being strongly incentivised to publish just for the sake of publishing, while we have a growing number of journals making money from publishing the resulting articles, you have a perfect storm,” said Professor Marcus Munafo of Bristol University. “That is exactly what we have now.”

    The harm done by publishing poor or fabricated research is demonstrated by the anti-parasite drug ivermectin. Early laboratory studies indicated it could be used to treat Covid-19 and it was hailed as a miracle drug. However, it was later found these studies showed clear evidence of fraud, and medical authorities have refused to back it as a treatment for Covid.

    “The trouble was, ivermectin was used by anti-vaxxers to say: ‘We don’t need vaccination because we have this wonder drug,’” said Jack Wilkinson at Manchester University. “But many of the trials that underpinned those claims were not authentic.”

    Wilkinson added that he and his colleagues were trying to develop protocols that researchers could apply to reveal the authenticity of studies that they might include in their own work. “Some great science came out during the pandemic, but there was an ocean of rubbish research too. We need ways to pinpoint poor data right from the start.”

    The danger posed by the rise of the paper mill and fraudulent research papers was also stressed by Professor Malcolm MacLeod of Edinburgh University. “If, as a scientist, I want to check all the papers about a particular drug that might target cancers or stroke cases, it is very hard for me to avoid those that are fabricated. Scientific knowledge is being polluted by made-up material. We are facing a crisis.”

    This point was backed by Bishop: “People are building careers on the back of this tidal wave of fraudulent science and could end up running scientific institutes and eventually be used by mainstream journals as reviewers and editors. Corruption is creeping into the system.”


    So this is going to be your excuse for avoiding reading scientific papers after pretending you did.




    That fraud exists has been understood for years, but what most seem to realize that certain fields are far more effected by it than others. For instance, you are far, far more likely to come across a bogus paper on nutrition than for say for astronomy.

    Medical research is also currently a mess (again with some areas more adversely affected than others). One problem is that there are a bunch of fake, legitimate sounding journals that keep popping up which will print your "research" if you pay them from which you can use that to push for everything from grant money to getting the results picked up and covered by the media.

    The cable TV show "Adam Ruins Everything" covered this in an episode on nutrition where they reported on a journalist who had a fictitious study claiming that eating chocolate helps you lose weight (Chocolate with high cocoa content as a weight-loss accelerator) published in the International Archives of Medicine for 600 Euros. It was picked up by multiple news outlets often getting front page coverage.

    The entire affair can be read about here: I Fooled Millions Into Thinking Chocolate Helps Weight Loss. Here's How as well as here: How the "chocolate diet" hoax fooled millions.

    The host of the aforementioned TV show, Adam Conover, had his own fraudulent study "The Possible Irritating Effects of Nutritional Facts" published in a faux journal called Advances In Nutrition And Food Technology to confirm that this does indeed happen. It was pretty obvious that the publisher never read it for it is a blatant spoof.


    ETA: I would be remiss if I didn't include Sokal's hoax
    Last edited by rogue06; 03-22-2024, 08:58 AM.

    I'm always still in trouble again

    "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
    "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
    "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
      So this is going to be your excuse for avoiding reading scientific papers after pretending you did.




      Rambo's little brother now pretends to be a mind reader.
      Last edited by Hypatia_Alexandria; 03-22-2024, 09:14 AM.
      "It ain't necessarily so
      The things that you're liable
      To read in the Bible
      It ain't necessarily so
      ."

      Sportin' Life
      Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
        Rambo's little brother now pretends to be a mind reader.
        Stringing words together hoping to obtain coherency?

        A thousand monkeys banging away on a thousand typewriters have better odds. smiley snicker.gif

        I'm always still in trouble again

        "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
        "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
        "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
          Stringing words together hoping to obtain coherency?
          I thought it rather apposite. Rogueambo struck me as rather clunky

          However, while we know fakes and frauds have occurred and I remember when the Sokal hoax was first reported and also had Bulhak's Postmodernism generator site saved on my computer as a source of amusement. The concern is, as the article notes, the alarming leap in barely a year of such papers being published.

          And when we laypersons on Tweb cite scientific papers on this board in support of our contentions, none of us can be entirely certain that the research is reliable because none of us are experts in those myriad scientific fields and disciplines.

          Hence the title of this thread.
          "It ain't necessarily so
          The things that you're liable
          To read in the Bible
          It ain't necessarily so
          ."

          Sportin' Life
          Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
            Those of us who offer links to scientific papers should do so with caution given that none of us are qualified experts in any those various fields.
            Some of us are qualified experts in some of those fields.

            Jorge: Functional Complex Information is INFORMATION that is complex and functional.

            MM: First of all, the Bible is a fixed document.
            MM on covid-19: We're talking about an illness with a better than 99.9% rate of survival.

            seer: I believe that so called 'compassion' [for starving Palestinian kids] maybe a cover for anti Semitism, ...

            Comment


            • #7
              https://thatsmathematics.com/mathgen/

              paper.jpg

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Roy View Post
                Some of us are qualified experts in some of those fields.
                Some of us might be but not all, and certainly not my previous correspondent.
                "It ain't necessarily so
                The things that you're liable
                To read in the Bible
                It ain't necessarily so
                ."

                Sportin' Life
                Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

                Comment


                • #9
                  The Potential Role of Bacon Grease in Quantum Entanglement Communications
                  Sparko the Pirate, Ph.D, EBF, LMNOP, MD.

                  Abstract
                  This paper explores the unconventional idea of using bacon grease as a lubricant for quantum particles involved in entanglement communications. We propose a theoretical framework for the interaction between organic compounds and quantum states, and discuss the potential implications for quantum communication systems.

                  Introduction
                  Quantum entanglement is a fundamental phenomenon in quantum mechanics where two or more particles become linked and instantaneously affect each other, regardless of the distance separating them. This property is harnessed in quantum communications to transmit information securely. The concept of using bacon grease, an organic compound with unique physical properties, as a lubricant for quantum particles, presents an intriguing area of exploration.

                  Methods
                  We employ a combination of quantum mechanical models and molecular dynamics simulations to investigate the interaction between bacon grease molecules and quantum particles. The study focuses on the potential effects of such interactions on the entanglement properties and the overall stability of the quantum states.

                  Results
                  Our simulations suggest that the fatty acids in bacon grease could create a conducive microenvironment for quantum particles, potentially reducing decoherence and enhancing entanglement longevity. The results are presented using hypothetical data and charts, illustrating the relationship between the viscosity of bacon grease and the coherence time of entangled states.

                  Discussion
                  The discussion delves into the feasibility of integrating organic compounds like bacon grease into quantum communication systems. We also address the challenges and limitations of this approach, including temperature stability and the need for precise control over the molecular composition.

                  Conclusion
                  While the idea of using bacon grease in quantum entanglement communications is speculative, this paper opens the door to considering a wider range of materials in the quest to optimize quantum communication technologies.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Does 'caveat lector' translate to "I never kill more people than I can eat"?
                    Jorge: Functional Complex Information is INFORMATION that is complex and functional.

                    MM: First of all, the Bible is a fixed document.
                    MM on covid-19: We're talking about an illness with a better than 99.9% rate of survival.

                    seer: I believe that so called 'compassion' [for starving Palestinian kids] maybe a cover for anti Semitism, ...

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Roy View Post
                      Does 'caveat lector' translate to "I never kill more people than I can eat"?
                      Oh ha ha!
                      "It ain't necessarily so
                      The things that you're liable
                      To read in the Bible
                      It ain't necessarily so
                      ."

                      Sportin' Life
                      Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                        So this is going to be your excuse for avoiding reading scientific papers after pretending you did.




                        That fraud exists has been understood for years, but what most seem to realize that certain fields are far more effected by it than others. For instance, you are far, far more likely to come across a bogus paper on nutrition than for say for astronomy.

                        Medical research is also currently a mess (again with some areas more adversely affected than others). One problem is that there are a bunch of fake, legitimate sounding journals that keep popping up which will print your "research" if you pay them from which you can use that to push for everything from grant money to getting the results picked up and covered by the media.

                        The cable TV show "Adam Ruins Everything" covered this in an episode on nutrition where they reported on a journalist who had a fictitious study claiming that eating chocolate helps you lose weight (Chocolate with high cocoa content as a weight-loss accelerator) published in the International Archives of Medicine for 600 Euros. It was picked up by multiple news outlets often getting front page coverage.

                        The entire affair can be read about here: I Fooled Millions Into Thinking Chocolate Helps Weight Loss. Here's How as well as here: How the "chocolate diet" hoax fooled millions.

                        The host of the aforementioned TV show, Adam Conover, had his own fraudulent study "The Possible Irritating Effects of Nutritional Facts" published in a faux journal called Advances In Nutrition And Food Technology to confirm that this does indeed happen. It was pretty obvious that the publisher never read it for it is a blatant spoof.


                        ETA: I would be remiss if I didn't include Sokal's hoax
                        I believe it's the foundation for when she wants to summarily dismiss a paper without addressing it. It's the same way she dismisses polling she doesn't like by asking "Did they question every single person?" Admittedly, given that she is a hypocrite, she'll cite polls when they support her.

                        It's also the same way she'll ask people for experience on one hand, then dismiss "your experience doesn't make you an expert" on the other depending on which version allows her to dismiss your point without ever addressing it.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by CivilDiscourse View Post

                          I believe it's the foundation for when she wants to summarily dismiss a paper without addressing it. It's the same way she dismisses polling she doesn't like by asking "Did they question every single person?" Admittedly, given that she is a hypocrite, she'll cite polls when they support her.

                          It's also the same way she'll ask people for experience on one hand, then dismiss "your experience doesn't make you an expert" on the other depending on which version allows her to dismiss your point without ever addressing it.
                          Then you belief is erroneous.

                          I posted this thread for us all to be wary about citing papers on subjects of which we know nothing or very little. There may be one or two individuals, like Roy, who are qualified experts in specific scientific disciplines but even for an expert a subject totally removed from their own area of expertise will pose some issues.

                          However, the majority who regularly post to this board are not qualified in the sciences.
                          "It ain't necessarily so
                          The things that you're liable
                          To read in the Bible
                          It ain't necessarily so
                          ."

                          Sportin' Life
                          Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

                            Then you belief is erroneous.

                            I posted this thread for us all to be wary about citing papers on subjects of which we know nothing or very little. There may be one or two individuals, like Roy, who are qualified experts in specific scientific disciplines but even for an expert a subject totally removed from their own area of expertise will pose some issues.

                            However, the majority who regularly post to this board are not qualified in the sciences.
                            I'll wait and see. You've shown your intellectual dishonesty time and time again, as ive already described

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by CivilDiscourse View Post

                              I'll wait and see. You've shown your intellectual dishonesty time and time again, as ive already described
                              Whatever I post you will be sure to find something about which to quibble. Your life would not be complete otherwise.
                              "It ain't necessarily so
                              The things that you're liable
                              To read in the Bible
                              It ain't necessarily so
                              ."

                              Sportin' Life
                              Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

                              Comment

                              Related Threads

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by seanD, Today, 01:25 PM
                              0 responses
                              3 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post seanD
                              by seanD
                               
                              Started by VonTastrophe, Today, 08:53 AM
                              0 responses
                              25 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post oxmixmudd  
                              Started by seer, Yesterday, 01:12 PM
                              28 responses
                              165 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post oxmixmudd  
                              Started by rogue06, 04-17-2024, 09:33 AM
                              65 responses
                              453 views
                              1 like
                              Last Post Sparko
                              by Sparko
                               
                              Started by whag, 04-16-2024, 10:43 PM
                              67 responses
                              412 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post seanD
                              by seanD
                               
                              Working...
                              X