"Scientists have an absolute obligation to honesty"
The 5 Sept 08 issue of the journal Science has an editorial by Bruce Alberts which contains the text:
The publication of a scientific article is less a way for scientists to earn recognition and advance their careers than it is an engine of scientific progress.
IPBiz notes that it is too bad that fuzzy-thinking IP professors don't recognize the same point about patents. The public benefits primarily by disclosure of information.
Alberts continues: Science continually advances only because many cycles of independent testing by different scientists allow new knowledge to be built with confidence upon old knowledge, thereby creating a repository of reliable understandings about the world. Sounds sort of like some things LBE has written, as to patents.
Alberts goes on: The publications of those of us who are scientists explain what we have found in our investigations, and they lay out exactly what we have done to make each discovery. Clear truthful presentations of data, results, and methods are essential for enabling the findings of one scientist to be confirmed, refuted, or extended in new ways by other scientists.
Alberts talks about honesty: Scientist have an absolute obligation to honesty. They must accurately report how they arrived at their discoveries, as well as the discoveries themselves. Thus, our journals must insist on detailed descriptions of all of the methods used, so as to allow other scientists to reproduce the results in a straightforward manner
321 Science 1271. IPBiz notes that it is sad that Science did not follow this advice in the Hwang Woo Suk matter, or in the reporting of Eli Kintisch on patent continuations.
In passing, note articles "Whole Genome Data Not Anonymous, Challeging Assumptions" [first sentence: Last week, scientists learned that a type of genetic data that is widely shared and often posted online can be traced back to individuals who proffered up their DNA for research.] 321 Science 1278.
Page 1281 notes "Taleyarkhan and his attorney are considering filing a grievance with Purdue, a lawsuit against the school, or both"
Page 1282 is titled "Shapeshifting Made Easy"
Page 1283 discusses a chess problem (in counting) from Carl Friedrich Gauss, and packing with a torus (Taking the Edge Off).
Page 1294 contains a letter commenting on an article by Gary Taubes (Bacteria fight back)
Page 1300 has an article "Enhancing Gene Regulation" by Wary and Babbitt which includes the text discussing Jacob and Monod:
They further argued that gene function is not only based on the biochemical activity of its product but also on how the gene's expression is regulated. This idea was expanded in 1975 in an influential paper by Mary-Claire King and Alon Wilson, who proposed that trait differences between humans and chimpanzees are primarily due to regulatory changes in gene expression.
The publication of a scientific article is less a way for scientists to earn recognition and advance their careers than it is an engine of scientific progress.
IPBiz notes that it is too bad that fuzzy-thinking IP professors don't recognize the same point about patents. The public benefits primarily by disclosure of information.
Alberts continues: Science continually advances only because many cycles of independent testing by different scientists allow new knowledge to be built with confidence upon old knowledge, thereby creating a repository of reliable understandings about the world. Sounds sort of like some things LBE has written, as to patents.
Alberts goes on: The publications of those of us who are scientists explain what we have found in our investigations, and they lay out exactly what we have done to make each discovery. Clear truthful presentations of data, results, and methods are essential for enabling the findings of one scientist to be confirmed, refuted, or extended in new ways by other scientists.
Alberts talks about honesty: Scientist have an absolute obligation to honesty. They must accurately report how they arrived at their discoveries, as well as the discoveries themselves. Thus, our journals must insist on detailed descriptions of all of the methods used, so as to allow other scientists to reproduce the results in a straightforward manner
321 Science 1271. IPBiz notes that it is sad that Science did not follow this advice in the Hwang Woo Suk matter, or in the reporting of Eli Kintisch on patent continuations.
In passing, note articles "Whole Genome Data Not Anonymous, Challeging Assumptions" [first sentence: Last week, scientists learned that a type of genetic data that is widely shared and often posted online can be traced back to individuals who proffered up their DNA for research.] 321 Science 1278.
Page 1281 notes "Taleyarkhan and his attorney are considering filing a grievance with Purdue, a lawsuit against the school, or both"
Page 1282 is titled "Shapeshifting Made Easy"
Page 1283 discusses a chess problem (in counting) from Carl Friedrich Gauss, and packing with a torus (Taking the Edge Off).
Page 1294 contains a letter commenting on an article by Gary Taubes (Bacteria fight back)
Page 1300 has an article "Enhancing Gene Regulation" by Wary and Babbitt which includes the text discussing Jacob and Monod:
They further argued that gene function is not only based on the biochemical activity of its product but also on how the gene's expression is regulated. This idea was expanded in 1975 in an influential paper by Mary-Claire King and Alon Wilson, who proposed that trait differences between humans and chimpanzees are primarily due to regulatory changes in gene expression.
posted by Lawrence B. Ebert at 6:39 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home