#whynotkenneth

Dear reader,

I would like to take couple of minutes of your time to explain a frustration that hit me like an earthquake. I could feel the shivering all the way to my bones. It made me think of a new definition of science, similar to how one revises a religion in order to explain an unexplainable event. We all know now that thunder is not Mjolnir, the hammer of Thor striking the earth, yet for millennia people did think this was the ground truth. And that exactly brings me to the source of my frustration. What is “ground truth” in modern day science?

This gets even more complex when one considers that the confinements of a research field are fading. This is especially true in life sciences, because inherently everything is indeed connected, from the genome all the way to the proteome with a plethora of equally interesting fields in between, each with their own challenges and own beliefs.

So how do we connect all of our research? Sadly, this is currently achieved through proper citations in manuscripts. In many cases, a scientist and the ideas he or she represents is not even captured in those few letters that make up a name at the end of a reference table. Who really admits to read these when not looking for a particular topic?

Exactly this publication-driven world leads to discrepancies. Indeed dear reader, I’ve been struck with the hard and cold fact that science is still following a particular opinion rather than evidence and discussion. I’ve seen selective deafness and the filtration of knowledge to tailor results into a storyline that appeals reviewers and journals… For me personally, it is an immensely disappointing and discouraging reality.

So in summary, I would like to throw the following out there:

Science has become a battle between founding incredible collaborations and the construction of an unprecedented community with endless opportunities for great and correct research against the pressure for fame, fortune and fakes installed by journals and research institutions. I plea for more consideration, because in the end, real and validated data should speak louder than any microphone on stage when given the chance.

Despite it all, have a good one!

 Cheers,

 Kenneth