most scientific papers are wrong?

Many years ago, I did a simple experiment. Result was exciting. I was asked to perform another experiment based on these results. I knew that the result would be a failure. Still I was asked to do. I did. All my animals died. Then we had to do the experiment in another way. I did. By the time, I got all the results, deadline for submitting the papers was over. During this time, I was asked to "EXTRAPOLATE" the results of one experiment and send the paper. I refused. i inssted on performing atleast 10 experiments. What would happen if the first experiment was flawed? Well, I lost my grants. Three is a mad rush on the part of researchers to PUBLISH. Today, we have very sophisticated software for anything. With the software, it is possible to create experiments, original data, statistics, pie graphs etc to demonstrate whatever. Today's Scientific quest lacks integrity. Example is the Korean molecular biologist who claimed to have cloned ahuman being. If only all the Scientists will examine everything with integrity, most of them will not support Evolution. Belief in evolution is very convenient for the modern researcher. He will get grants, he will keep his tenures, he will get graduate students etc. This will perpetuate. One graduate student did an excellent piece of work for his Ph.D thesis. It went to the defence. In spite of the quality of the work, the work was rejected because, he happened to be a Creationist. Even a faculty member who is in a board for a Creation Society disapproved the thesis. Here it is consensus that matters. It is no longer facts to substantiate one's own beliefs.There is academic tyranny controlling publications, student evaluation, faculty tenures and much more. 80 % of the papers published are merely done for professional gains. Quality of work is only assessed by the Number of papers published, but not on the quality of work. How sad it is today!!!

The experiment was to study the role of Zinc on the seizure response of rats.Addition of zinc to synaptosomes altered the uptake of tryptophan. I was advised to inject zinc by intracisternal injection in rats "EVERYDAY FOR 5 DAYS" and perform the study. It is common sense that when you puncture the cavity, the fluid drains. You can do once. But repeated injections will drain much of the fluid. This was my objection. My objections as overruled. All the animals died on the 3rd day which I predicted. Dr.Julius Axelrod gave a lecture on Acetyl choline receptors. After the lecture, I asked a simple question" When a neurotransmitter is attached to the receptor, the membrane fluidity around the receptor is decreased. If so, the complex must be floating. What holds the complex in place? He did not answer. I was punished for this. When you challenge the Ivory towers, your career is finished. This is how ideologies are perpetuated. In other words we see academic tyranny everywhere. Critical thinking is only a word in the dictionary of the past. If you draw a bell curve, you can classify 3 categories of scientists even with Ph.D's.15% on the left are the best and exceptional. 60% in the middle are the mediocre Scientists. The rest 15 % are good for nothing. If I had a choice between a First grade BS(Bachelor of Science) and 3rd rate Ph.D, I would only hire the First Grade BS. I have met few brilliant men who never had any degrees at all. They contributed more to the advancement of Science than Ph.D's from prestigious universities. There is no reason for you to become so angry at my remarks. If you are not aware of all these events, that does not mean that they do not exist. I am not discrediting the entire Scientific community. Thre are many brilliant men and women with Ph.D's and they are contributing a lot.Having a Ph.D is great. It goes with too many sacrifices. I had to struggle my way through "INCOMPETENT" bosses. In all my career, I was assigned difficult projects which were given up by others. They could not do. When I became successful, papers were published and I did not even have any acknowledgement.They received raises and promotions for the work they could not do. So, when I apply for jobs, they only count the NUMBER of papers.How am I supposed to get papers? I helped my colleagues with their work. My hobby is Electronic instrumentation and so, I modified the devices so that they could complete their studies. It was agreed that I would be an author in the publications. The papers were published. Once again, I was not even acknowledged. Where is Integrity in Science? No one cares about the quality of work.
Having a Ph.D does not make anyone a Scientist. A dog sitting in a garage does not become a car. Then, what makes a Scientist? It is not publishing papers. But, producing USEFUL work for the society. What good is it to measure the fat content of the adipose tissue in an African Elephant?You can add dust to a liver homogenate. You will always find something increse and something decrease. Paper can be published. What will make this more meaningful is to determine what causes the change, what is the magnitude and what are the implications. 80% of the papers published are not even worth reading. But, that is the only way for the survival. That is the way it will be.About the Ph.D dessertation, one of the examiners gave me the information. When Foxes are guarding the chicken house, where will the chickens be?

No, this is impossible. Unpublished atricles do not mean anything.

Sample size is critical. A large sample size is always useful. The smallest number in a given experiment could be 10 to have a meaning ful result. Once again, it depends on what is being studied. If there are too many variables, then sample size needs to be increased.This message has been edited by inkorrekt, 02-08-2006 10:24 PM

You are an exception. You are fortunate. Even the brilliant young Scientist can be doomed if he does not have a good mentor who is equally passionate about Science.Graduate schools are paper mills. The tenure demands that they publish papers to justify the position. The graduate students must produce papers. The higher the Greater their success as faculty. What will a young Scientist do? He will have to sacrifice his passions to get aposition. This perpetuates. My sister in law was afaculty in a medical school. She was laid off because, she lost her grants. Those days when the Scientists toiled day and night because of the passion are all gone. If you read the life of Pierre and Marie Curie, it is fascinating. We do not have scietists of that caliber anymore. The Director of my research lab passed away. He had an MD in Physiology. His hobby was electronics. He collected 2nd world war junk and designed his own cathode ray oscilloscope. It looked like a huge cabinet with controls like steering wheels. It worked. With this contraption, he identified stretch receptors in the lung. They are in Text books now. These receptors are named after him. Paintal Receptors. This I call as real research. His papers are original and are classical references.You are wrong when you said, I was derailing the entire Scientific community. I never said that. You can criticize me over anything. But, the facts do not change.I also had an Electronic Engineer who had the degree. But, he did not know the basics of electronics. He burnt few of my devices. My hobby is electronics. In the graduate school. I maintained many of the instruments which even the technician and the in house engineer could not fix. They studied but, did nto have common sense. I was able to troubleshoot only by reading the manuals. Once, the Beckman SLiquid Scintiollation counter failed. The engineer came and replaed the high bvoltage transformer. It still did not work.My advisor asked me to look at it. From the schematics, I asked him if he checked the power oscillator transistrs. He did not. He did not even know how to test them. With my little knowledge, I showed him. There was another defective component. Ihelped him to replace. IT worked. I did the work and he got paid. I am not unhappy. My excitement over the instrumetn working was worth more than money.

Finally, i found someone with the same passion as myself. In my previous posts, I mentioned that such things happen which should not. It is a travesty. My research grants were cutoff at a time when President Reagan was in office. In way what he did was right. The mediocre work costs the tax payer a lot. I was hurt by his actions. But, it was good for hte country. I only wish the Scientific community will set up its own standards to regulate. Well, such a regulation will kill the motivation and there will be no more creativity at all. i wish you and your colleagues all success. I have to write a book about all that happens in Science.You might read the fascinating book by Dr. Candace Pert, "Molecules and Emotions". I could never leave the book after I started it. I even cried twice. I met her in a conference. I went through the same as herself. I am not going to give any more information as you will still not believe me. Only one thing I will say is. I was asked to extrapolate the results of one experiment for a conference. I refused. My grant was cut off.
This is when I was a Post Doc. Yes, I made the biggest mistake in my career of not waiting for the grants at the Max Plank Institute in Germany. Instead, I came to an obscure Medical School here only for additional pain and disappointment.This message has been edited by inkorrekt, 02-12-2006 03:11 PM

Scientific dominance: Yes, it is true that US dominated all the technology. Even today, we still dominate.Our space programs have given lots of newer technologies that we use everyday. There is a new trend happening here. India and China are beginning to dominate our technology. You are attributing the decline of the competitiveness of our students to poor learning of Maths and Science. You are right on. It is argued that there is shortage of money for Schools. In my state, we gave them 1-2% increase in budget every year. This has put our budget in perpetual hole. Still they want more. What we have done is to add more oil in a leaking engine. What we need is not more money. But, real education.What Reagan did was to reform the upper end of the spectrum. Scchols>>Colleges>>Universities>>Research labs.He did not touch the schools. What Reagan did was to reform the upper end by cutting down the WASTES in the name of Research in Academics and National labs. Yes, he realized that there were too much of JUNK SCIENCE at the expense of the TAX PAYER. You will not like this. But, this is reality.Why our students fail? Yes we do not EDUCATE them. We give them papers to those who do not qualify. We have converted our Schools into social engineering labortories. We do not promote competition at all as it would diminish Self Esteem. Psychology dominates. Students are taught Multiculturalism, Sexuality, and even witchcraft and much more of non academics. The important subjects like History, English , Maths and Science are at the bottom. Even Science teaching is flawed. Instead of encouraging them to apply CRITICAL THINKING to every aspect of their studies, they are only allowed to accept some theories as FACTS and not even question them. They are not even given other options in the absence of any evidence to prove their FAITH.If this is how we teach Science, no wonder they are not doing well.Here is another example of our Social engineering Laboratories contribution to the well being of our society. A student cannot even get Aspirin without Parent's approval. However, a Pregnant Teen age girl can get an ABORTION without her parent's knowledge. These can only happen in this most sophisticated and Advanced country Like the USA.Yes, Time only will tell us where we are headed to. The ancient Romans were proud of their great civilization. They were warned about the consequences of immorality. They ignored. This great civilization became history. Will America go through the same? Yes, time only will tell. Yes, we are paying heavily for the blunders committed by the Nuclear Physicist, Jimmy Carter. He gve the nuclear technology to North Korea and they are threatening us. He also punished our friend, The Shah of Iran. Now, they are going to "NUKE" us. He also gave away the Panama Canal. He is a friend of our enemy Chavez. We have been invaded by Mexico. Our life style is being diminished. We are losing all our manufacturing sector to China, India and Mexico. If this is not transformed, Where will we be in 5-10 years? It is a scary thought.This message has been edited by inkorrekt, 02-12-2006 03:06 PM

Chiroptera: You have really impressed me though we do not agree with each other. Not too many students will go for Chemistry as it is a not a fun subject. Even my classmates in School could not figure out the structures of Organic compounds. They went to Medical Schools. There too,the Organic Structures became brick walls for them. Yet, you are pursuing. This takes tremendous amout of courage. I wish you all success. You also demonstrated courage to challenge us. Keep this up. You will become a great Scientist, if you will begin to apply CRITICAL THINKING to your understanding of Chemistry. In order to make a small beginning, I would strongly urge you to Criticlly examine Intelligent Design along with Evolution. This has stirred so much of controversy. Both opposing concepts cannot be true. Only one has to be True. which one is this? You decide.

Dominance in science is a very important and a serious issue.Yes, we the americans have been domineering technological inventions. However, we also believe in free market. We gave away crucial technologies even to our enemies (China received the GPS technology from Lorral Aerospace) China also received IBM supercomputer. China does not play a fairgame.So, we are the loosers. Japan killed our electronic industry. They take our technologies, improve upon them and sell them back to us.This is one aspect. Why do we spend on defence? We do not have gold standard anymore. The dollar's worth is sustained only by what we make and what we export. We hepled the 3rd world countries and they do not buy as much as they did before. The only assets we have are the military hardware. Ours is still the best. We even sell our junk hardware to our enemies. We must do this to sustain our economy. What happens when no one buys our hardware? This is when we need awar. In 1991 economy was in terrible shape. The gulf war boosted it.I hate wars. But, on 911 we were attacked and we had to respond. We did. So, unless we reestablish gold standards, our economy will only depend on Defence production as well as wars. So, once in 10 years, we need a war??????I hope this explains why we spend money on defence rather than on science. Spending more money on Science will not accomplish anything. It will be like adding more oil to a leaking engine. Where is the leak? The leak is the School system controlled by the Department of Education. Not only this, but the monopoly of the school system by the Democrat party also. The school system is not fair to the students. The schools deny the opportunity for "CRITICAL THINKING" Without critical thinking, Creativity is lost. This is where the fundamental problem is.We have also trained foreign graduate students who do not stay here. But, return and develop their technology. Sometimes, even to our detriment. We trained amicrobiologist in our Defence laboratories and she developed a biowrfare agent for Saddam Hussein.We are highly vulnerable. We can still recover from these losses. HOW? Go back to the basics. Stop politicizing Science. Let there be freedom. Let there be School Choice. Public Schools mass produce illiterates. Our politicians will not allow alternates which have proved to be great success. When we suppress excellence and encourage MEDIOCRICITY, who is to be blamed for declining Science?This message has been edited by AdminNWR, 02-23-2006 06:06 PM

You are right. When I said, the sample size must be atleat 10, I only meant a highly controlled group with very little variables. For example adult male rats weighing 90 to 100 grams body weight.If you are studying a human population, the sample size must run into thousands.

You are right on. Learning the theory and applying them in practise are two different issues. It takes along time to achieve this. Unfortunately many engineers have to complete the degree program and get employed. Too many of them lack this ability to read between lines and find the solution. Our schools do not focus on multidiciplinary approach and even problem solving.Electronic components are too sensitive with static electtricity. Component failure is an issue. From the practical point of view component testing is very rarely done nowadays.The technology has also changed. We have microcircuits and modules for every function. From component level, now we have to go to the level of modules. Therefore, it must be lot easier for the engineers to do troubleshooting now.

This was never meant to insult anyone. We are not in ideal institutions. There are the best schools where they are highly disciplined with high morals. Not all the faculty follow such self imposed discipline. If every one followed this, we do not have to ahave this discussion at all.When you described how you work, I have to salute you for upholding ethics in your work. I am wishing you all the best. My observations were made at a medical school where I was a Post Doc. My grant was cut off becaue I refused to extrapolate the data from 1 experiment to 8 for an abstract for a conference.This is unbelievable yet, true. A graduate student of my boss did not even know the difference between a poly peptide and aprotein. Paper mills exist. you cannot deny this. Pursuing science in simple terms is nothing but, mental discipline. The most important issue underlying everything is the motive. If the motive is to publish papers, then ethics are out of the window. I am yet to find someone to ask me what did I accomplish. This ought to be the measure of the competency of a scientist. I have only been asked "HOW MANY PAPERS DO YOU HAVE"? I am really irritated with this question. I am not against publishing papers. Papers are important. The question is what should be published? You can have a gas chromatograph and analyse the lipid profile of the adipose tissue of an african elephant. Is it worthy of publication? Does it help the society in any way? These are the question every scientist must ask.I am sure most of those in science want to do their best. However, pressures over tenures, grants etc do not allow them to do the best. Yes, when you become hte faculty, you will find out.

I do not think so. In unpublished materials, you only find the quote. There is no inforamtion on the objective, experimental design, experimental data, results and discussion. Without these, it is hard to critique.

Thanks for this post. I am glad that there is somebody who is realistic and highly observant.