564
RFK Jr.’s health department calls Nature “junk science,” cancels subscriptions (arstechnica.com)
submitted 1 year ago by to c/nottheonion@lemmy.world
73 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] -50 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Anecdotal only, sorry. I'm sure it varies by field, and it's more about letters than longer papers. There are probably fields where Nature is excellent, but I know that there is at least one where the odds of a letter to Nature being accurate a few years later is about 50%.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 23 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    but I know that there is at least one where the odds of a letter to Nature being accurate a few years later is about 50%.

    ...

    you know, there is a difference between "getting published in Nature" and "submitting your work to Nature". It's subtle, perhaps: one involves being published in the journal. For the world to see and scrutinize.

    I bet they get lots of letters that they do, indeed, find aren't well substantiated enough to publish.

    Also, one field. Lmao.

    Also, please tell me why you made your first comment, I'm genuinely curious. Did you read about this somewhere? Where, if you recall?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •