Discussion
Loading...

#Tag

Log in
  • About
  • Code of conduct
  • Privacy
  • Users
  • Instances
  • About Bonfire
petersuber
petersuber
@petersuber@fediscience.org  ·  activity timestamp 4 weeks ago

Update. "We conduct a comprehensive comparison between peer-review scores and citation-based metrics across various scientific fields [in Italy]…While both evaluation methods exhibit sex bias, peer review systematically penalizes women more severely than citation-based metrics."
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751157725001245

#Gender #GenderBias #ScholComm

petersuber
petersuber
@petersuber@fediscience.org replied  ·  activity timestamp 3 days ago

Update. A letter to the editor about a study I posted to this thread 11/23/25: "The suggestion that [the lower #retraction rate for women] is because male researchers undergo more scrutiny, propose bolder ideas and lead larger and more dynamic teams than do female researchers implies that male scientists are better at science. As female scientists, our lived experience points to alternative explanations: elevated rigour and scientific integrity by female scientists or more critical peer review of female-led manuscripts."
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-026-00120-y
( #paywalled)

#Gender #GenderBias #ScholComm

  • Copy link
  • Flag this comment
  • Block
petersuber
petersuber
@petersuber@fediscience.org  ·  activity timestamp last month

#Elsevier finally (after 25 years) retracted the primary study concluding that #glyphosate is safe for humans. Glyphosate is the active ingredient in the #Roundup herbicide, manufactured by #Monsanto.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0273230099913715

h/t @civodul.
https://fediscience.org/@civodul@toot.aquilenet.fr/115661046263238211

Among the grounds for the retraction:
* "The article's conclusions…are solely based on unpublished studies from Monsanto."
* "Employees of Monsanto may have contributed to the writing of the article without proper acknowledgment as co-authors."
* "The authors may have received [undisclosed] financial compensation from Monsanto for their work on this article."

Remember that in 2020, the #Trump #EPA "relied almost entirely on #Monsanto studies" to conclude that Roundup was safe.
https://x.com/petersuber/status/1224039859272212480

In 2016, Monsanto made a show of sharing its research on glyphosate with the public. But instead of making it #OpenAccess, it put print copies in a room in Brussels, required registration to use the room, and then closed the room after two months.
https://web.archive.org/web/20190119214350/https://plus.google.com/+PeterSuber/posts/ioy1fVqaLy1

Two questions for follow up studies:
1. Why did Elsevier's 𝘙𝘦𝘨𝘶𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘺 𝘛𝘰𝘹𝘪𝘤𝘰𝘭𝘰𝘨𝘺 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘗𝘩𝘢𝘳𝘮𝘢𝘤𝘰𝘭𝘰𝘨𝘺 need 25 years to retract this piece of Monsanto advertising?
2. What harm did the article cause during the last 25 years?

petersuber
petersuber
@petersuber@fediscience.org replied  ·  activity timestamp 2 weeks ago

Update. Watch this division within the #Trump admin. (1) The Trump #EPA still considers #glyphosate to be safe for humans. "An EPA spokesman…said the agency was aware of the article’s #retraction [and] said the EPA’s assessment of glyphosate’s risks had not relied solely on the study." (2) But the Make America Healthy Again [#MAHA] movement led by #RFKJr wants to ban glyphosate. RFKJr "once served as co-counsel in a lawsuit against #Monsanto over exposure to #Roundup."
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/02/climate/glyphosate-roundup-retracted-study.html

#Medicine #USPol #USPolitics

  • Copy link
  • Flag this comment
  • Block
Hacker News
Hacker News
@h4ckernews@mastodon.social  ·  activity timestamp 2 months ago

Influential study on glyphosate safety retracted 25 years after publication

https://www.lemonde.fr/en/environment/article/2025/12/03/influential-study-on-glyphosate-safety-retracted-25-years-after-publication_6748114_114.html

#HackerNews #glyphosate #retraction #study #safety #science #environment

  • Copy link
  • Flag this post
  • Block
petersuber
petersuber
@petersuber@fediscience.org  ·  activity timestamp 2 months ago

Good point from Shigeki Matsubara: When a #retraction stems from the author's request, the retraction notice should say so.
https://www.jmaj.jp/detail.php?id=10.31662/jmaj.2025-0364

#ScholComm

  • Copy link
  • Flag this post
  • Block
Nicolas Fressengeas boosted
Quark
Quark
@quark@framapiaf.org  ·  activity timestamp 6 months ago

Trop gros, trop cher, trop moche..., le système de publications scientifiques est à bout de souffle. Un article de "niche" pour passer un bon été :https://www.lemonde.fr/sciences/article/2025/07/07/le-monde-des-revues-scientifiques-au-bord-de-l-asphyxie_6619660_1650684.html
(allez au bout car il y a des messages d'espoirs...)

et en bonus, un "appui" sur l'usage de l'IA qui n'arrange rien,
https://www.lemonde.fr/sciences/article/2025/07/07/comment-l-ia-bouscule-les-publications-scientifiques_6619655_1650684.html

#science #preprint #recherche #pci #pubpeer #matilda #openaccess #retraction
@BorisBarbour @enroweb @ElisabethBik

  • Copy link
  • Flag this post
  • Block
Quark
Quark
@quark@framapiaf.org  ·  activity timestamp 6 months ago

Trop gros, trop cher, trop moche..., le système de publications scientifiques est à bout de souffle. Un article de "niche" pour passer un bon été :https://www.lemonde.fr/sciences/article/2025/07/07/le-monde-des-revues-scientifiques-au-bord-de-l-asphyxie_6619660_1650684.html
(allez au bout car il y a des messages d'espoirs...)

et en bonus, un "appui" sur l'usage de l'IA qui n'arrange rien,
https://www.lemonde.fr/sciences/article/2025/07/07/comment-l-ia-bouscule-les-publications-scientifiques_6619655_1650684.html

#science #preprint #recherche #pci #pubpeer #matilda #openaccess #retraction
@BorisBarbour @enroweb @ElisabethBik

  • Copy link
  • Flag this post
  • Block
petersuber
petersuber
@petersuber@fediscience.org  ·  activity timestamp 8 months ago

Update. New study: "Male first authors have higher #retraction rates, particularly for scientific misconduct such as plagiarism, authorship disputes, ethical issues, duplication, and fabrication/falsification. No significant gender differences were found in retractions attributed to mistakes."
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S175115772500046X

  • Copy link
  • Flag this post
  • Block

bonfire.cafe

A space for Bonfire maintainers and contributors to communicate

bonfire.cafe: About · Code of conduct · Privacy · Users · Instances
Bonfire social · 1.0.1 no JS en
Automatic federation enabled
Log in
  • Explore
  • About
  • Members
  • Code of Conduct