how do we stop mass-murdering scientists?https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/368350/scientific-research-fraud-crime-jail-time
>>16345533>After the revelations, a new meta-analysis was published in 2014, evaluating whether to use beta blockers before cardiac surgery. It found that a course of beta blockers made it 27 percent more likely that someone would die within 30 days of their heart surgery. That is, the policy which Poldermans had recommended using falsified data, adopted in Europe on the basis of his research, was actually dramatically increasing the odds people would die in heart surgery.>Tens of millions of heart surgeries were conducted across the US and Europe during the years from 2009 to 2013 when those misguided guidelines were in place. One provocative analysis from cardiologists Graham Cole and Darrel Francis estimated that there were 800,000 deaths compared to if the best practices had been established five years sooner. While that exact number is hotly contested, a 27 percent increase in mortality for a common procedure for years on end can add up to an extraordinary death toll.
>>16345535>falsifying data for niche job securitypretty based desu
>>16345533I dont get why we dont redo entire studies to double check its accuracy if the results are important. Apparently scientists are scrambling for job security so why not let a good chunk of them do exactly that when they have nothing else going on? It simultaneously kills an incentive to publish fake results as well as the fake results themselvesThe scientific process is broken, everyone acknowledges it but i dont see many people proposing any kind of solution
>>16345533So the peer reviewers aren't checking anything and the journals aren't checking anything. And the solution is to add a 3rd layer of people who will check things but only if they're informed of wrongdoing. Sounds like nobody wants to take responsibility for anything.
>>16345533Prosecute Fauci
>>16345533He single-handedly committed Rwandan-scale genocide... interesting. >>16345535I don't even understand the motive. Seems like an incredibly marginal benefit to himself. He could have just published standards and said don't use beta blockers, and presumably his career as a doctor would have been unaffected.
>>16345588>peer reviewers aren't checking anythingIt's not the peer-reviewer's job to replicate experiments or sus out fraud. At best they do a basic sanity check. Most of them have other stuff to review and other responsibilities. Most papers aren't being scrutinized for fraud.
>>16345602It seems like the hospitals or clinical staff open themselves up to lawsuits for medical experimentation, no informed consent, etc. While they did it unintentionally, this is what insurance is for. And insurance companies could be a group that applies a lot of pressure if such lawsuits start popping up. In what fucking world is something okay to do when it has not been replicated?
>>16345578You can redo studies all you want. The problem is that you won't get published just for confirming someone else's results, and you most certainly won't be getting any citations for it. And without these, you won't get any money. >so why not let a good chunk of them do exactly that when they have nothing else going on?That'd be never, then. Everyone is always working on at least a few papers.
>>16345588>So the peer reviewers aren't checking anythingglorified spellcheckers and maybe reviewing some words don't sound too goofy
>>16345657The funny thing is that this spellchecking is outsourced to India, and they will naturally fuck everything up, so the authors have to do the spellchecking twice, once when finishing the manuscript and then again when checking the proof.
>>16345655Im not familiar with how science jobs work but i recognize the problem is making repeating studies economically viable.When a study gets cited, does a portion of the money spent going through the paywall go to the author of the research paper? If so, 10% of that can be shared for all those who repeated the study. I believe this would incentivize repeating a popular research paper as 10% of potentially tens of thousands is not horrible while discouraging repeating a study that already has alot of repeats
>>16345578>>16345675He's full of shit. Scientists don't get paid to do studies. They're salaried and usually professors who have to publish new work regularly or lose their tenure. It's called "publish or parish" and it means that nobody has time to do the same studies over again. The best you get are scientific reviews which aggregate dozens of papers on the same topic and analyze the results using statistics.
>>16345602>Most papers aren't being scrutinized for fraud.Maybe they should be. A monetary reward for finding fraud, and maybe even for finding just general errors, might create more interest. Like how software developers offer bug bounties for finding errors in their software.
>>16345758>A monetary rewardPaid by who, moron? You?
>>16345768there's two sides to everything
>>16345743it would make sense if the new work was any good, but it's mostly garbage
>>16345797The university, or the journal, or both. Or maybe it comes out of the scientists salary, the scientist that used the fake data or made all the errors. Bounties wouldn't be huge, just a few thousand dollars or something. There would be lots of ways to do it
>>16345675Journals refuse to publish repeats of studies
>>16346107Journals don't pay to publish, moron. Universities have an incentive to not waste time repeating their work because they have a limited budget and their prestige is directly tied to the volume of new research that comes out of the university.>Or maybe it comes out of the scientists salaryHow much money do you think they make? Ballpark an average for me.>Bounties wouldn't be huge,>just a few thousand dollars or something. So much irony here. A few thousand dollars? Way too much money for the university or a single staff member to pay out for "errors" and simultaneously not nearly enough to replicate most studies. Hunting for bugs in code only requires a competent programmer to invest man-hours. It requires no real investiture. The difference between checking code and setting up a whole new experiment should be immediately obvious to you.Have you ever even been to a university? Like even just for a tour?
>>16346408You are responding to a bot.
>>16345533Be careful what you wish for.
>>16345533It's been pointed out for years, but even more so more recently, that science will inevitably become corrupted when funding is dependent on results matching a desired outcome.That's obviously not the case with all research, but you can be damn sure it plays an incredibly huge role overall when the NHI is involved. There's been many who have frustratingly called it out to no avail.
>>16345533>how do we stop mass-murdering scientists?Retard cope. You are not a good person just because you are too inept, lazy, or retarded to even attempt to better conditions for everyone else. As for the scientists that gave an honest attempt, they at the very least tried.
>>16347148Ah. The "Uproot your life, stop being a wagie, risk poverty, and be the change YOU want to see in a satano-jew industry that actively penalizes living in reality or else you're complicit," argument. Very bold and incorrect, but I find the chutzpah entertaining. Doubly so that you follow it with the "Trust the heckin' scientisterinos," followup.
>>16347148Im a good person because i dont put my laziness in a situation where it negatively affects millions of livesWould you rather i go into a nuclear powerplant and make an honest attempt to operate the thing?
>>16346408>Universities>limited budgetLOL! Certain departments might have limited budgets but that's due to choices of the university to prioritize something else. If universities budgets were based on how much of their research survived validation, you'd see a lot more internal review. Give bonuses to universities who expose flawed research at other universities. In cases where fraud is discovered, not just sloppy work, that's a felony. Actually prosecute those crimes. If you steal a dozen $100k trucks from Billy Bob Motors, you're going to prison for a long time. If you steal a million from the government through fraudulent research result claims, you get maybe a shrug and more likely higher prestige as your "research" is cited instead of debunked.>Where would the money come from?From where it already comes from. This is about reallocated the flow of money into actual research and away from Science Research Theater.
>>16347513You are straight up a retard. When you grow up and move out of your parents house I hope you remember this post and are embarrassed.
>>16347148>at least they triedi've killed less people than them, and i'm not even a doctor, lmao
>>16345533By sharing infowars and banned.video links.You can also buy and fund the info war by getting high quality life improving supplements.
>>16345535>Tens of millions of heart surgeries were conducted across the US and Europe during the years from 2009 to 2013I don't believe this.
>>16348240one guy got operated 9 million times, that wrecked the statistics
>>16345533we havent even started yet.
>>16345675>>16346357Journals only care about novel work rather than repeating old studies, and instead of journals paying scientists, scientists actually have to pay pretty hefty fees even after being accepted. This means the journals and funding agencies (who are the ones who actually pay scientists the bulk of the money rhey need to conduct experiments) control the direction of research and naturally they want to discover new stuff instead of double-checking old work. This would be fine if peer review were actually an effective check on crappy or downright fraudulent work, but most scientists are too busy writing grants to get funding from aforementioned agencies or retooling their papers to meet tje increasingly autistic editing requirements of prestigious journals to have time to seriously examine the papers they have to review. Basically, peer review, along with teaching and mentoring students is not rewarded as much as it used to be due to journal and grant writing creep.
>>16346408im thinking 60-70k in America for research scientist II
>>16348240Apparently US and Europe operate between 1 and 2 million heart surgeries per year, so yeah, tens of millions sounds rather high for ~4 years.
>>16345533Killing normie cattle in the name of science is a crucial part of our civilization's scientific and technological development.You automatically agree to it virtue of being part of it.If the normies don't like it they can leave for the forest (which they won't).
>>16345533Fauci in jail yet? I'm waiting
>>16348964>He thinks research scientists work at universitiesYou know what, anon. I agree. All research scientists should be legally required to publicly release their research and the company employing them should be legally required to perform the experiment in triplicate.
>>16349062where's the advancement, nigger? everything is just shittier. nutrition science spent half a century wrecking people for no good reason
>>16349682Meat is now cheaper for the enlightened few.Our children are vastly superior to the masses.Transgenderism and the queer movement are cleaning the gene pool of autists and the mentally ill.Human-made climate change is greening the world's forests and will ultimately increase the total habitable amount of land when the large inland seas form in the great basins and the coast of Antarctica is exposed.This is not a defence mechanism, anon.Every downside simply has an upside. It is simply our learned moral attitude which determines our reaction.But personally I am thankful for all the obese cattle.It is now easy to be better and more succesful than 95% of the population by simply going to the gym.These guilible people are pacified for the needs of the future enlightened man, what some here would consider Luciferians, what Christians would consider Satanists and what someone like Nietzsche might have labelled a Hyperborean.Even Joseph Goebbels said that "subhumans exist in every people as a leavening agent".
>>16345602So it's not their job to do anything. Got it.
>>16350557Ask Tooker if peer reviewers do nothing
>>16349292>yet another "soience" narcissist who has a fantasy life in which they are president of the world and make all the laws why is this grandiose /pol/ tier fantasy life so common on /sci/? should the posters here at least have a fantasy life based around /sci/ topics?
>>16346408as a side you're not doing yourself any favors with the constant insults
>>16354479You aren't doing yourself any favors by being a moron.
>>16352893>"The universities have to pay to have their studies checked!">"Okay, then the corporations have to do the same thing.">"NOOOO!!1 WHY ARE YOU LIKE A DICTATOR?1?! THAT'S A FUCKED UP POWER FANTASY"
>>16345533imagine trusting scientists
>>16345578There is no incentive in science to replicate studies or to publish negative results
>>16345533>atheists hijack science and redefine science to be the search for naturalistic explanations instead of simply studying the world with the five senses>science becomes amoral and full of figurative prostitutes and "scientists" will claim boys can become women and faggotry is healthy despite being less healthy than smoking a pack of cigarettes every day>>16347148The doctors you worship kill thousands of people every day, probably more, and you think they're making the world a better place. You're a fool, a brainwashed subhuman NPC fool who does and thinks as told by the big pharma sponsored media. Kill yourself-- or just get a bunch of experimental injections and die.
>>16345533>BoobaWhy is there Booba
>>16357301Look in the mirror and say that three times.
>>16349062Or we could just rob universities.
>>16345578>I dont get why we dont redo entire studies to double check its accuracy if the results are important.You won't get funding.
>>16346408>How much money do you think they make? Ballpark an average for me.NTA.
>>16345554>pretty based desuInstitutional corruption is in no way based, you fucking rat
>>16345588why would they want to stop abusing the academic press to give perceived credibility to their propaganda?
>>16345533peer review studies instead of relying on unverified claims. its that simple
>>16349062You agree to me robbing you as a scientific experiment by existing.
>>16349062You agree to me shoving a spike up your asshole for existing and referring to humans as "cattle". I am curious to see how long you will live before you beg to die. It would be an interesting experiment.
>>16345599>He single-handedly committed Rwandan-scale genocide... interesting.Very scary that something like that can happen, especially with such a pathetic motive
>>16347600>devolves into insultsI accept your concession, now let the big, smart men talk, okay?
>>16345533why is her tiddy exposed?
>>16358717Actually he was working against institutional interests and serving his own. It is immoral to waste resources to people with bad hearts. High IQ Aryan Blue eyes Poldermans was based for making sure they would have worse outcomes to prevent beetus selection to save the nederlands from the dreaded weight inflation observed in species like the Americanus.
>>16345533stop putting them in charge of anything
>>16373308It's symbolic of bare chested justice or truth or something
>>16345533Governments gotta step in. It's the only way.
Considering that those who knowingly commit academic fraud are basically fucking over the entire human race, execute them.
>>16347148uh oh someones triggered
>>16345533>how do we stop mass-murdering scientists?Have you tried not killing scientists? It isn't hard.
>>16345535>>Lies to make a bunch of fatties with clogged arteries dieBased
