Editorial: The Challenges of Sharing Data in an Era of Politicized Science - Bauchner,Fontanarosa Nov 2019

[Sly Saint]

The goal of making science more transparent—sharing data, posting results on trial registries, use of preprint servers, and open access publishing—may enhance scientific discovery and improve individual and population health, but it also comes with substantial challenges in an era of politicized science, enhanced skepticism, and the ubiquitous world of social media.

The recent announcement by the Trump administration of plans to proceed with an updated version of the proposed rule “Strengthening Transparency in Regulatory Science,”1 stipulating that all underlying data from studies that underpin public health regulations from the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) must be made publicly available so that those data can be independently validated, epitomizes some of these challenges.2,3

According to EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler: “Good science is science that can be replicated and independently validated, science that can hold up to scrutiny. That is why we’re moving forward to ensure that the science supporting agency decisions is transparent and available for evaluation by the public and stakeholders.”3

Above all, the scientific process—including original research and reanalysis of shared data—must prevail, and the inherent search for evidence, facts, and truth must not be compromised by special interests, coercive influences, or politicized perspectives. There are no simple answers, just words of caution and concern.

(This Editorial is available for online commenting.)

full editorial here:
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2756117

(note, article was retweeted by MS who is now 65th President and Chairman of the Board of the Academy of Consultation-Liaison Psychiatry)

 

[ladycatlover]

Bloody hell, with his history Sharpe has a nerve retweeting this!

 

[rvallee]

full editorial here:
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2756117

(note, article was retweeted by MS who is now 65th President and Chairman of the Board of the Academy of Consultation-Liaison Psychiatry)

This is odd because Wheeler is a career coal industry lobbyist who denies climate change and has worked very hard at politicizing science and sued the EPA many times, wants to defund it entirely (yes, he wants to entirely defund the agency he is in charge of). He has blocked reports, gagged scientists and elevated science deniers in positions of influence where they can, and do, overrule scientists. He is also part of efforts to entirely defund agencies like NOAA precisely because they share public data that contradict his climate change denial aims. He is, in fact, the ultimate industry hack, you can hardly be any more anti-science than this guy.

This initiative looks exactly like a deceitful attempt to politicize science while pretending otherwise. So I'm not surprised that Sharpe agrees with that, the intent has nothing to do with the stated goals. He is exactly on that side of things, politicising science while pretending to be on a crusade to do the opposite. Either he agrees with that, likely, or is too clueless to tell otherwise, or he didn't read the article. Either way, typical Sharpe.