Kristian G. AndersenGeverifieerd account

There is sadly truth in this statement. The people who generate the data deserve serious credit, and all publications arising should give that credithttps://twitter.com/NathanGrubaugh/status/1226242809520414720 …

I think this is especially true in China where scientists are often under intense pressure to publish high impact papers. A lot of negative reinforcement when getting scooped.

Yeah. Perverse incentives are rampant in this

This is frustrating and short-sighted. Studies that incorporate public sequence data will be very high-level at best. The submitters have access to troves of non-public clinical/epi/outcomes data. Much more impactful papers.

Openness doesn't have to be at the expense of publications. If you are relying on descriptive reports of a few sequences to boost your h scores for promotion, getting scooped is perhaps the least of your problems.

* Didn't mean to imply that high-level modeling and phylogenetic papers weren't useful. They're critical for public health. But I'd argue that most individual submissions are not going to be that interesting or jeopardize your ability to publish later on.