The hottest Scientific Integrity Substack posts right now

And their main takeaways
Category
Top U.S. Politics Topics

Trump Or No, Science Badly Needs To Look Inward And Heal Itself

Singal-Minded • 1406 implied HN points • 10 Feb 25
🔬 Science Research Ethics Scientific Integrity Public Trust
  1. There are serious problems in Alzheimer’s research, including fraud and negligence, which make it hard to trust the current science. Many studies are flawed, yet the same theories keep getting pushed.
  2. Public trust in science is declining, partly because people see failures in mainstream research. People need to question and hold science accountable instead of just believing it blindly.
  3. Scientific institutions must work harder to self-correct and ensure quality in research. If they don't, they risk losing more trust and could make it easier for anti-science forces to gain influence.

The NIH must make these 8 reforms right now

Vinay Prasad's Observations and Thoughts • 123 implied HN points • 11 Feb 25
🏥 Health Politics Scientific Integrity Research Ethics Public Trust
  1. The NIH should reduce indirect costs because a lot of the money is not spent effectively. Instead of letting universities keep so much, more money could go directly to help research.
  2. We need to be careful with which studies get funding. Some research doesn't tell us anything useful, and it's a waste of taxpayer money.
  3. It's important to make sure that scientific research can be repeated and verified. If a lab can't replicate results, they should lose funding.

Scientists Say

Doomberg • 6757 implied HN points • 16 Oct 24
🔬 Science Climate change Meteorology Environmental Science Public Trust Scientific Integrity
  1. Predictions for the hurricane season this year were very alarming, with many experts expecting a lot of severe storms. But as the season progressed, there were fewer storms than anticipated.
  2. When hurricanes did occur, some were extremely powerful, but overall, the lack of activity puzzled scientists and led to discussions about climate change's role in future storm patterns.
  3. Trust in scientists and experts has declined, as many people feel unsure about their predictions and analyses, highlighting a disconnect between scientific findings and public perception.

Attribution Stealth Advocacy at the NAS

The Honest Broker Newsletter • 1089 implied HN points • 04 Nov 24
🌞 Climate & Environment Climate Policy Climate Science Environmental advocacy Scientific Integrity Extreme Weather
  1. A new committee formed by the National Academy of Sciences is seen as biased because it includes members with ties to groups that have an agenda against climate policy. This raises concerns about conflicts of interest.
  2. Some advocates argue that linking climate change to individual weather events is part of a strategy to support climate lawsuits, which might compromise the integrity of scientific research.
  3. There are worries that the push for extreme weather event attribution could replace established scientific frameworks, risking the credibility of major scientific institutions like the IPCC.

Addressing Research Fraud

The Good Science Project • 89 implied HN points • 27 Jan 25
🔬 Science Scientific Integrity Open Science Medical Research Social Science
  1. The Good Science Project aims to help investigate research fraud and support whistleblowers. They want to make it easier for people to report misconduct in science.
  2. Research fraud is a common problem, with many scientists admitting to questionable practices. Reports suggest that a significant number of researchers have seen or engaged in misconduct.
  3. The project plans to provide legal and educational resources for those worried about speaking out against fraud. They want to empower more people to come forward about their concerns.
Get a weekly roundup of the best Substack posts, by hacker news affinity:

NIH study sections are broken

Vinay Prasad's Observations and Thoughts • 106 implied HN points • 29 Jan 25
🏥 Health Politics Research Funding Public Health Scientific Integrity Policy Debate Health Disparities
  1. NIH study sections often fund unambitious science instead of groundbreaking research. This is a problem because many mediocre scientists are in charge, which doesn't help advance science.
  2. There's a heavy focus on diversity and inclusion in NIH grants, but much of it just repeats what we already know. Instead, we need better treatments for everyone, regardless of race or status.
  3. The review process for grants can discourage scientists from speaking out on important issues. This silence can lead to a lack of innovative ideas and solutions in research.

What I would change at NSF

Heterodox STEM • 355 implied HN points • 01 Dec 24
🔬 Science Research Funding Public Policy STEM Education Scientific Integrity Government reform
  1. The NSF should refocus on funding high-quality scientific research based solely on merit rather than identity politics.
  2. Key reforms include changing their vision and core values to prioritize excellence in science.
  3. Unnecessary offices and initiatives that do not contribute to scientific advancement should be eliminated to streamline the NSF's efforts.

The Unstoppable Momentum of Outdated Science: 2024 Update

The Honest Broker Newsletter • 2316 implied HN points • 19 Feb 24
🔬 Science Scientific Integrity Climate Science
  1. Climate research and policy are still heavily based on outdated and misleading scenarios like RCP8.5, which are causing a disconnect from reality and hindering progress.
  2. Studies in various fields can continue to gain momentum, even if they are based on flawed or outdated foundations, leading to a waste of resources and efforts.
  3. There is a pressing need for a significant reset in climate research to address the widespread usage of obsolete scenarios like RCP8.5, despite the acknowledged divergence from real-world data.

We Should Try to Directly Measure the Value of Scientific Papers

Nonsense on Stilts • 59 implied HN points • 20 Jul 24
🔬 Science Research Methods Information Theory Statistical Analysis Scientific Integrity Decision Theory
  1. We should measure the value of scientific papers to understand their real impact. If a paper doesn't change how people act or think, then it may not be worth much.
  2. To figure out the value of a paper, we can use a formula that compares what outcomes we expect with the information from the paper versus without it. This helps us see if the research is actually useful.
  3. It's important to have good estimates and decisions tied to the research to see its true worth. By doing this, we can better judge which scientific papers are really making a difference.

More suggestions for FDA reform for a Trump presidency

Vinay Prasad's Observations and Thoughts • 98 implied HN points • 07 Nov 24
🏥 Health Politics Public Health Regulatory Affairs Healthcare policy Scientific Integrity
  1. The FDA should stop allowing pharmaceutical companies to advertise directly to consumers. This could help reduce biased promotion of drugs.
  2. It's important to improve transparency in the FDA's decision-making process and ensure that medical advice is based on solid evidence.
  3. We need better oversight of the fees the FDA charges for reviews so that smaller businesses aren't unfairly priced out, and more funding should go into tracking the safety of drugs after they are approved.

"You are being misinformed"

The Honest Broker Newsletter • 1707 implied HN points • 21 Jun 23
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Climate Science Congress Scientific Integrity Misinformation
  1. Misinformation in climate science is a significant issue, especially due to outdated climate scenarios like RCP8.5 and RCP4.5.
  2. Scientific integrity is crucial to uphold in producing accurate information for policy-making.
  3. Financial conflicts of interest can complicate expertise, leading to the perpetuation of misinformation.

Climate change is easy to prove if you screw the pooch badly enough

Tilting At Windmills • 334 implied HN points • 02 Feb 24
🌞 Climate & Environment Climate change Climate models Data Collection Scientific Integrity
  1. Climate change models have not accurately predicted outcomes despite drastic measures being proposed.
  2. Temperature readings used to support climate change claims may be inaccurate due to biases in monitoring stations.
  3. There is skepticism around the credibility of climate scientists and their data collection methods.

Silencing Climate Whistle-Blowers

The Climate Historian • 19 implied HN points • 02 Aug 24
🌞 Climate & Environment Climate change Environmental Policy Scientific Integrity Political Influence Whistleblowing
  1. Climate scientists often face pressure from political leaders, leading to threats against their work. For instance, Virginia Burkett, a scientist at USGS, was demoted for opposing harmful actions by the Trump administration.
  2. Historical cases show that scientists like James Hansen faced censorship for speaking out on climate change. Even reputable scientists can be silenced because of their messages that contradict certain political views.
  3. The influence of special interests can lead to significant changes in scientific priorities. This jeopardizes crucial climate research as short-term profit motives often take precedence over environmental concerns.

An open invitation to resolve the vaccine misinformation problem

Steve Kirsch's newsletter • 7 implied HN points • 15 Oct 24
🏥 Health Politics Vaccine debate Misinformation Public Health Scientific Integrity Health Policy
  1. Misinformation about vaccines can seriously harm people, and we can't fix it with threats or censorship. It needs open discussions based on science.
  2. Health authorities are currently avoiding conversations about vaccine misinformation, which makes it harder to address the issue effectively.
  3. Censorship doesn't work for solving debates about vaccines. Instead, we should encourage public discussions to find out the truth and potentially save lives.