Yes, scientific journals should publish political rebuttals

(The headline is partly click-bait, as I admit below, because some context is required.) From ‘Should scientific journals publish political debunkings?’Science Fictions by Stuart Ritchie, August 27, 2022:

Earlier this week, the “news and analysis” section of the journal Science … published … a point-by-point rebuttal of a monologue a few days earlier from the Fox News show Tucker Carlson Tonight, where the eponymous host excoriated Dr. Anthony Fauci, of “seen everywhere during the pandemic” fame. … The Science piece noted that “[a]lmost everything Tucker Carlson said… was misleading or false”. That’s completely correct – so why did I have misgivings about the Science piece? It’s the kind of thing you see all the time on dedicated political fact-checking sites – but I’d never before seen it in a scientific journal. … I feel very conflicted on whether this is a sensible idea. And, instead of actually taking some time to think it through and work out a solid position, in true hand-wringing style I’m going to write down both sides of the argument in the form of a dialogue – with myself.

There’s one particular exchange between Ritchie and himself in his piece that threw me off the entire point of the article:

[Ritchie-in-favour-of-Science-doing-this]: Just a second. This wasn’t published in the peer-reviewed section of Science! This isn’t a refereed paper – it’s in the “News and Analysis” section. Wouldn’t you expect an “Analysis” article to, like, analyse things? Including statements made on Fox News?

[Ritchie-opposed-to-Science-doing-this]: To be honest, sometimes I wonder why scientific journals have a “News and Analysis” section at all – or, I wonder if it’s healthy in the long run. In any case, clearly there’s a big “halo” effect from the peer-reviewed part: people take the News and Analysis more seriously because it’s attached to the very esteemed journal. People are sharing it on social media because it’s “the journal Science debunking Tucker Carlson” – way fewer people would care if it was just published on some random news site. I don’t think you can have it both ways by saying it’s actually nothing to do with Science the peer-reviewed journal.

[Ritchie-in-favour]: I was just saying they were separate, rather than entirely unrelated, but fair enough.

Excuse me but not at all fair enough! The essential problem is the tie-ins between what a journal does, why it does them and what impressions they uphold in society.

First, Science‘s ‘news and analysis’ section isn’t distinguished by its association with the peer-reviewed portion of the journal but by its own reportage and analyses, intended for scientists and non-scientists alike. (Mea culpa: the headline of this post answers the question in the headline of Ritchie’s post, while being clear in the body that there’s a clear distinction between the journal and its ‘news and analysis’ section.) A very recent example was Charles Piller’s investigative report that uncovered evidence of image manipulation in a paper that had an outsized influence on the direction of Alzheimer’s research since it was published in 2006. When Ritchie writes that the peer-reviewed journal and the ‘news and analysis’ section are separate, he’s right – but when he suggests that the former’s prestige is responsible for the latter’s popularity, he’s couldn’t be more wrong.

Ritchie is a scientist and his position may reflect that of many other scientists. I recommend that he and others who agree with him consider the section from the PoV of a science journalist, when they will immediately see as we do that it has broken many agenda-setting stories as well as has published several accomplished journalists and scientists (Derek Lowe’s column being a good example). Another impression that could change with the change of perspective is the relevance of peer-review itself, and the deceptively deleterious nature of an associated concept he repeatedly invokes, which could as well be the pseudo-problem at the heart of Ritchie’s dilemma: prestige. To quote from a blog post in which University of Regensburg neurogeneticist Björn Brembs analysed the novelty of results published by so-called ‘prestigious’ journals, and published in February this year:

Taken together, despite the best efforts of the professional editors and best reviewers the planet has to offer, the input material that prestigious journals have to deal with appears to be the dominant factor for any ‘novelty’ signal in the stream of publications coming from these journals. Looking at all articles, the effect of all this expensive editorial and reviewer work amounts to probably not much more than a slightly biased random selection, dominated largely by the input and to probably only a very small degree by the filter properties. In this perspective, editors and reviewers appear helplessly overtaxed, being tasked with a job that is humanly impossible to perform correctly in the antiquated way it is organized now.

In sum:

Evidence suggests that the prestige signal in our current journals is noisy, expensive and flags unreliable science. There is a lack of evidence that the supposed filter function of prestigious journals is not just a biased random selection of already self-selected input material. As such, massive improvement along several variables can be expected from a more modern implementation of the prestige signal.

Take the ‘prestige’ away and one part of Ritchie’s dilemma – the journal Science‘s claim to being an “impartial authority” that stands at risk of being diluted by its ‘news and analysis’ section’s engagement with “grubby political debates” – evaporates. Journals, especially glamour journals like Science, haven’t historically been authorities on ‘good’ science, such as it is, but have served to obfuscate the fact that only scientists can be. But more broadly, the ‘news and analysis’ business has its own expensive economics, and publishers of scientific journals that can afford to set up such platforms should consider doing so, in my view, with a degree and type of separation between these businesses according to their mileage. The simple reasons are:

1. Reject the false balance: there’s no sensible way publishing a pro-democracy article (calling out cynical and potentially life-threatening untruths) could affect the journal’s ‘prestige’, however it may be defined. But if it does, would the journal be wary of a pro-Republican (and effectively anti-democratic) scientist refusing to publish on its pages? If so, why? The two-part answer is straightforward: because many other scientists as well as journal editors are still concerned with the titles that publish papers instead of the papers themselves, and because of the fundamental incentives of academic publishing – to publish the work of prestigious scientists and sensational work, as opposed to good work per se. In this sense, the knock-back is entirely acceptable in the hopes that it could dismantle the fixation on which journal publishes which paper.

2. Scientific journals already have access to expertise in various fields of study, as well as an incentive to participate in the creation of a sensible culture of science appreciation and criticism.

Featured image: Tucker Carlson at an event in West Palm Beach, Florida, December 19, 2020. Credit: Gage Skidmore/Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA 2.0.

Curious Bends – commoner panthers, space diplomacy, big data sells big cars and more

Curious Bends is a weekly newsletter about science, tech., data and India. Akshat Rathi and I curate it. You can subscribe to it here. If have feedback, suggestions, or would just generally like to get in touch, just email us.

1. Why the GM debate in India won’t abate

It is a sign of its inadequacy that the debate on genetically modified crops in India is still on, with no end in sight. Although public consensus is largely polarised, the government has done its bit to postpone resolution. For one, decisions on GM crops are made as if they were “technical answers to technical questions”. For another, no formal arena of debate exists that also addresses social anxieties. (8 min read)

2. One foot on Earth and another in the heavens

Camera traps installed by the Wildlife Conservation Society of India have shown that about one in ten of all leopard images belong to black leopards (that is, black panthers). These melanistic big cats have been spotted in wildlife reserves in Kerala and Karnataka, and seem commoner in the wetter forests of the Western Ghats. In fact, written records of sightings in these parts date from 1879, and could aid conservation efforts in a country that lost its cheetahs in 1960. (2 min read)

3. One foot on Earth and another in the heavens

For smaller and middle income nations, strengthening institutional and technical capacity on the ground might be a better option than to launch satellites because more than vanity, the choice makes them better positioned to gather useful data. And if such a nation is in South Asia, then India’s planned SAARC satellite could make that choice easier, providing a finer balance between “orbital dreams and ground realities”. (5 min read)

+ The author, Nalaka Gunawardene, is a journalist and science writer from Colombo, Sri Lanka.

4. Do big car-makers know their way around big data?

When sales slumped, Mahindra & Mahindra, an Indian car-maker, used data gleaned from the social media to strip its former best-selling XUV500 model of some features and sell it cheaper. The company declined to give further details. This isn’t unique—big car-makers around the world are turning to big data to widen margins. But do they know how best to use the data or is it just that putting the squeeze on this lemon is a fad? (6 min read)

5. A geothermal bounty in the Himalayas

As the developing world edges toward an energy sufficiency crisis, scientists, environmental conservationists and governments get closer to a Mexican standoff. This is no better highlighted than with the gigawatts of geothermal energy locked up in the Himalayas. A 20-MW plant could “save three million litres of diesel”, $2 million and 28,000 tons of carbon dioxide in northern India per year. Why isn’t it being used? (2 min read)

Chart of the week

“Both [female genital mutilation and child marriage] stem from deeply rooted social norms which can only be changed by educating parents about the harm they cause. Making foreign aid conditional on results gives governments an extra incentive not just to pass laws, but to enforce them. Police and women’s activists in some countries have set up phone hotlines and safe houses for victims or girls at risk. Most important … is to make sure that girls go to school and finish their studies.” The Economist has more.

20140726_IRC374

If you learnt something new from Curious Bends, why not spread the word? Share this week’s newsletter with your friends and ask them to subscribe. Have a nice day!

Hearing test, radiation-resistant cells, sign language and more

Curious Bends is a weekly newsletter about science, tech., data and India. Akshat Rathi and I curate it. You can subscribe to it here. If have feedback, suggestions, or would just generally like to get in touch, just email us.

1. Poor children deserve better hearing tests; an Indian entrepreneur may have the solution

An estimated 63 million people in India suffer from hearing problems. But children are not tested for such impairment at a young age because of the costs of testing. Early detection and intervention is crucial for improving the difficulties with cognition and language skills. Now, a Bangalore-based inventor has come up with a solution that sharply lowers the cost of testing if a newborn can hear properly. (3 min read)

2. What makes cells resistant to radiation?

Radiation can damage cell’s DNA, and sometimes make them cancerous. But not all cells are affected by such radiation. Previously, it was thought that such ability was down to the DNA repair mechanisms in place in every one of them, but a new study shows that cells have more weapons to fight this invisible attack. (2 min read)

3. What sign language teaches us about the brain

As she took a course to learn sign language, a question kept nagging this neurobiologist: does the brain treat the visual language differently from spoken languages? Turns out, for the most part, they don’t. And yet brain studies of deaf people who use sign language helps bust a few myths about how our brains work. (5 min read)

+ The author of this piece, Sana Suri, is a neurobiologist at the University of Oxford.

4. Another biotech startup accelerator opens up in Bangalore. Can it deliver?

India’s biotech industry is supposed to be undergoing a boom. It was projected that revenues would reach $5 billion by 2009, but that hasn’t happened yet. Industry watchers remain optimistic, claiming that revenues will reach $100 billion by 2020. Can a startup accelerator help achieve this dream? (5 min read)

5. BRICS can boost their research by setting up collaborations, but there seems to be no will

The recent BRICS summit in Brazil saw the launch of the New Development Bank, which has been setup to rival the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. But there was little progress on setting aside joint funds to boost scientific collaboration. There is a huge potential here but no one is interested in tapping it. (2 min read)

Chart of the week

It has been a terrible week for the civilian aviation industry with Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 shot down over Ukraine and an ongoing investigation of Air Algerie Flight 5017 that crashed in Mali. Vasudevan Mukunth (one of the curators of Curious Bends; a.k.a. me) has collected the data of all such past events in one interactive chart.

screen-shot-2014-07-26-at-11-35-28-e1406399183451

If you enjoyed the links, please forward this email to friends and ask them to subscribe.

Finding quake shelters, breaking bad in Punjab, rice-wheat divide & more

Curious Bends is a weekly newsletter about science, tech., data and India. Akshat Rathi and I curate it. You can subscribe to it here. If have feedback, suggestions, or would just generally like to get in touch, just email us.

1. Pesticides may be to blame for some cancers among India’s farmers

The green revolution in India increased food production but the agrochemicals it used could also have set off a “cancer epidemic”. A three-year study by Punjabi University, Patiala, revealed no confounding factors across demographics except pesticides. Many patients, some of whom travel thousands of kilometers for affordable care, are from the revolution’s belt. (3 min read)

2. A socially cognizant tool to identify quake shelters

Nepali and German scientists have devised a method called Open Space Suitability Index to rank the suitability of public shelters that could be used as quake shelters. Uniquely for it, it assesses both physical and social vulnerability (that is, the risks people, businesses and governments face). (2 min read)

3. Spare the mafia, spoil the smuggler, dealer and consumer

Punjab has a drug problem. Despite widespread efforts by the state to blow it off, then blow it away, its Walter Whites and Jesse Pinkmans persist. One is a cop, the other might be a BSF jawan. Effectively, the Narcotics Control Bureau is lost for ideas, and it might be because the state is targeting the victims instead of the drug mafia. (29 min read)

+ The author of this piece, Ushinor Majumdar, is an ex-lawyer and a journalist with Tehelka.

4. Delayed survey derails health monitoring

As it is India lacks key data to better govern its people. Now, its main source of health statistics, the National Family Health Survey (NFHS), has been delayed. The NFHS is a large-scale household sample survey and produces internationally accepted estimates of fertility, mortality, contraceptive use, violence against women and, crucially, malnutrition. The latest survey should have been held in 2010, and it means for the last four years health workers have been blindsided. (2 min read)

5. Forget your 15 minutes of fame, think about your 15% chance of depression

Clinical depression has the dubious distinction of being the second most common cause of suffering in terms of burden of illness. The WHO has predicted it will become the leading cause of death by 2020. If this isn’t alarming, then sample this: new research says that every person in the world has a 15% chance of experiencing their first episode between the ages of 25 and 35. (4 min read)

Chart of the week

According to the 68th National Sample Survey (2011-2012), the consumption of rice has fallen marginally in a seven-year period while that of wheat is on the rise. There is a perceivable split between the Hindi heartland and the southern and eastern states which prefer wheat and rice, respectively. There is also an urban-rural and, intriguingly, a Jammu-Kashmir divide. Read more about it on Scroll.in.

1405378358-1351_Monthly-pc-qt-consumption-rice-urban

If you’re curious for more, follow Akshat and me on Twitter. Enjoy your week!

Delhi’s pollution, faked data, AIDS epidemic and more

Curious Bends is a weekly newsletter about science, tech., data and India. Akshat Rathi and I curate it. You can subscribe to it here. If have feedback, suggestions, or would just generally like to get in touch, just email us.

1. The puzzle of Delhi’s air pollution

Delhi has the world’s worst ambient air quality. In the decade since a chunk of its public transport moved to using compressed natural gas from petroleum, the problem has devolved into other socioeconomic issues. People whose power needs the city can’t meet use diesel generators. The number of cars on the road have shot up. Even though industries have been moved outside city limits, their smoke hangs like a pall together with that from burning post-harvest rice stalks from neighboring states. And a comparison with Beijing, where the civilian outcry against worsening pollution was pronounced, shows how much worse Delhi has it. (8 min read)

2. Indian scientist fakes data, but institute’s response is commendable

A scientist at the Institute of Microbial Technology in Chandigarh has been found to have fabricated data for seven papers published in the last year, all of which are now being retracted. The fabrication was brought to the attention of the director of the institute by a past supervisor of the scientist, and, instead of pushing it under the rug, the director followed the right procedures to start an investigation this January. Many Indian researchers both in India and abroad have had their work retracted, but as long as institutional provisions to deal with such misconduct are strong, it should help to curtail ills. (4 min read)

3. Clever experiment with mice reveals ovarian cancer’s secrets

Ovarian cancer starts spreading much earlier than other cancers do, and the first tissue that is its victim tends to be belly fat. It was previously thought this happens because of the physical proximity, but new research shows that the spread occurs through the blood. This matters because the proteins revealed to be involved in the process are targets of drugs meant for other types of cancers, and they could now be used to curtail the spread of ovarian cancer. (3 min read)

  • The author, Anwesha Ghosh, is a PhD student at the University of Rochester.

4. Give back to the locals if you profit from their knowledge

Fifty-one countries from around the world have ratified the Convention on Biological Diversity, which from October will give more legal backing to providers and users of genetic resources. These are commonly used to create better performing crop varieties. “Now, if a company or a person is accessing genetic resources or traditional knowledge for commercial purpose, they would be bound to share a part of their earning and profits with the community which has been conserving it.” (2 min read)

5. No one is tracking the lead that tyres leak

Lead is a neurotoxin that causes brain damage, and is most harmful to pregnant women and children. It has also been found that lead poisoning can be the cause of violent crime. Global campaigns to reduce the amount of lead in products such as fuel and paints have been going on for many decades with good success. However, in India, it seems that the campaign hasn’t been effective against lead’s use in tyres, where it is used to balance weights in the wheel. (3 min read)

Chart of the week

This week the annual international AIDS conference begins in Melbourne (despite the loss of researchers who were onboard MH17 that was shot down in Ukraine). The global fight against AIDS is being won, but some numbers, such as those below, are worrying. Pakistan has a population that is about one-sixth that of India, but the AIDS-related mortality is much lower in the neighboring country. More form UNAIDS here.

If you enjoyed this edition, please ask your friends to subscribe to Curious Bends.