This is really important. Stuff getting publicized *without a paper* and without sufficient time for many scientists to look at, digest, comment and contextualize can lead to terrible outcomes—needlessly scaring people. We saw that happen with widely misreported studies before.https://twitter.com/EricTopol/status/1364769339434409984 …
-
-
What’s the hurry? I am constantly fielding inquiries from people who are losing hope—I mean this, losing hope and suffering greatly—after reading such stories. Is it justified? Who knows without a paper? Just put the draft paper somewhere and let a couple of days pass.https://twitter.com/NathanGrubaugh/status/1364782285954899968 …
Show this thread -
This, too. The preprint needs to be online *before* the high-profile story goes public so that the scientific community has a chance to digest/respond. It's not a long process—people respond quickly. The consequences otherwise are real—and not healthy.https://twitter.com/LauringLab/status/1364915391152205824 …
Show this thread -
Otherwise, story goes out with too few people who see paper. Those few may be excellent, but nobody is infallible. A few is not enough. We've seen this happen. Not enough time to comment->few experts say something->big story->oops there was an issue->no way to undo public impact.
Show this thread -
It's a pandemic & peer review has been shortened or even being skipped. That's fine if done responsibly. There's a robust & real preprint & post-peer review process going on. It's great, actually. But huge finding to big news story with no chance to digest/respond? That's not it.
Show this thread -
Here's a NYC public health official pleading against "pathogen porn"—big media story gets published without letting the scientific community have even one day to digest/respond to a preprint. Happened too many times throughout last year to great harm.https://twitter.com/DrJayVarma/status/1364895908895354882 …
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
At the same time, you'll have people dismissing peer-reviewed studies that don't fit the agenda they want to push.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Even peer reviewed papers still get significant details “wrong” more frequently than most people think (not blaming the writers, research is hard). Spreading pre-pre-prints like these wide is irresponsible.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.