May 13, 2009
I recently read this article in the Economist, and was compelled to write this letter to the editor:
SIR - I applaud your recent article, "Catheter and Mouse" (published 7th May, 2009) where you note the "greatest gain" will come from the requirement that researchers share negative results. The scientific community has historically been loathe to share results of studies that don't confirm their hypotheses. The Journal of Negative Results in Biomedicine, founded in 1999, was a small step towards encouraging change in a culture set on burying research that doesn't prove a scientist's hypothesis to be correct. But maybe the new EU law (if passed) will be the big push that's needed to remind researchers that all data collected is useful and valuable to humanity. With the data crunching capabilites available today, our problem isn't how to crunch data, but rather ensuring we have large enough data sets to make accurate conclusions. Curbing pain and death among animals by requiring the distribution of all research results is a noble cause. But we musn't forget that we could also curb the death of many human beings if the data of failed experiments was required to be openly shared. I dare say my own country should follow the EU's lead and consider requiring the release of negative results of any experiment using even $1 of public funds.
---
I was inspired in part by this article from Wired, published back in Sept. '07.
Labels: science
Stumble
Leave your response