As usual our last day of training week is dedicated to stretching. Even if some of you think that this is unnecessary and boring, believe me, only people who have not stretched in a while and have lost their flexibility can truly appreciate the importance of this activity
Today I have also prepared a very unusual infopost, because it is very important for you not to be cheated by scientific fraud and so-called "research data" which, in fact, was ordered and financed by the interested party, which allowed them to control the results and manipulate the outcomes. It may sound weird, but this practise is quite common among pharmaceutical and food companies.
How can one distinguish truly scientific researches from scientific frauds which may look very compelling? Professor Eugeny Eidelman suggests to use objective method. He developed a simple questionaire for this purpose.
1. Does author have education in the field of the topic in question? Yes (0) No (1)
2. Does author belong to scientific school of the topic in question? Yes (0) No (1)
3. Does author has publications in proven scientific journals? Yes (0) No (1)
4. Does author has publications in the field of the topic in question in proven scientific journals? Yes (0) No (2)
5. Does author has any reviews on his work in proven scientific journals? Yes (0) No (2)
6. Does author has recommendations from famous scientists in this field of study? Yes (0) No (1)
7. Does author quotes other articles published in proven scientific journals? Yes (0) No (1)
8. Were all the works conducted openly or secretly? Open (0) Secret (1)
9. Was author's purpose to make a fundumental discovery in this field of study? No (0) Yes (2)
10. Does author publish gratitudes to other people for discussing his results of work?
11. Was author supported by any scientific foundations: INTAS, Soros, CRDF? Yes (0) No (1)
12. Is it possible to outline the ideas suggested by author in terms used in school books? Yes (0) No (1)
13. Is author refusing generally accepted theories? No (0) Yes (2)
14. Is there any verification of proposed ideas? Yes (0) No (1)
15. Does the author draw his evidence upon common philosophical and metodological bases? No (0) Yes (1)
16. Would implementation of proposed ideas create significat changes in life of society? No (0) Yes (2)
17. Is it necessary to follow existance rules and procedures to implement proposed ideas? Yes (0) No (1)
18. When should be implemented proposed results? In future (0) Right now (1)
A) If you answered NO more than 4 times in questions 1-6 then there is no point to believe in source. No need to analyse other answers.
If we've passed throught point A, but you get more than 6 points going throught questions 1 to 12, then there is no point to believe in source. No need to analyse other answers.
C) If we've passed throught point B, but you get more than 10 points in question 1 to 18 then there is no point to believe in source.
D) It is preferable that the author would answer himself to the questions 1-18, and questions from 13 to 18 should be answered by the person in charge of making a decision. If you get more then 4 points in question 13-18 and you get no more than 6 points in questions 1-18 then the authors questions should be be doubted and the source should not be considered worhtwile. </quote>
However this criterias are not 100% correct since it is difficult to define the scientific fraud itself, so each case should be judged on it's own. In several cases it would be really difficult to detect the fraud even if you are a specialist in this field, but in most cases this questionaire would work just fine.