[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[ccp4bb]: Re: [SUMMARY]: Problems with PDB entry 1muo
*** For details on how to be removed from this list visit the ***
*** CCP4 home page http://www.ccp4.ac.uk ***
Dear Flip,
I have especially appreciated your message for your views and your
sincerity. You're right in saying that you cannot force all the
crystallographic community to deposit all their data all the
time... (you can continue with Lincoln's quote paraphrasis) However, I
think your position is inconsistent, I will try to explain why.
Whereas I don't beleive myself being the master of the truth (I don't
believe either in one truth but in many) and I cannot be the judge of
everybody else without knowing why they do what they do, I have to
respectfully say that I wouldn't do the kind of work you're doing. By
principles, I think that science should be about collaboration, not
competition, as I think that research (and very especially research on
health or other socially related issues) should be guided by their own
aims (knowledge, social service) and not by profit or politics. Having
said so, I want to point out that there is very little research done
from the scratch, i.e. without use of previous knowledge. This is
certainly the case in our field. So, your results, our results, are
based in previous public results (and publicly founded I would add). If
we commit ourselfs with the profit demands of industry and keep our
results, particularly the most relevant, secret, our research would only
advance by bying or spying someone else results... Of course, industry
doesn't need so, because publicly founded research is still producing a
huge wealth of interesting science.
This is the inconsistence: if you accept secrecy as a valid policy, you
can hardly ask others to release their data.
No need to say, you may reject my principles. But let me give one
example. The WHO is announcing today (Africa Malaria Day):
http://www.rbm.who.int/cmc_upload/0/000/015/367/RBMInfosheet_6.htm
that over one million children (75% of them African children less than 5
years old) dies every year of malaria (that is: ~3000 a day).
This is a big failure of our so proud-of-itself system. Not only for
industry (which neglects non-profitable illness) but also for public
research, in which case, the pressure for "applicability" translates in
higher competitiveness and in giving in to industry. I know there's
people working indeed in malaria, tuberculosis, etc. I have friends on
it. But, are their means adequate? For example, why the final drugs
must be produced by companies? I can't accept the argument that says
"governments can't afford the costs of this". First, governments can
afford this, more easily as the big states afford the waste of money in
arms and so-called "legal" or "illegal wars". Governments can and have
a moral case to raise money for public health. Second, the costs of
drug developpment are inflated by publicity/lobbying that the
governments wouldn't need.
To the final par of your message, I agree.
Respectfully and sincerely,
Miguel
Flip Hoedemaeker <flip@keydp.com>, 24/04/2003:
> From: "Flip Hoedemaeker" <flip@keydp.com>
> To: "CCP4 bulletin board" <CCP4BB@dl.ac.uk>
> Subject: RE: [o-info] Re: [ccp4bb]: [SUMMARY]: Problems with PDB entry 1muo
> Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 16:42:09 +0200
> Importance: Normal
>
> *** For details on how to be removed from this list visit the ***
> *** CCP4 home page http://www.ccp4.ac.uk ***
>
> Wow, heated debate! I like that!
>
> Unfortunately for the Academic community, an increasing number of structures
> is being done in Industry, and probably the most interesting (read
> commercially interesting) ones will never be published, as a matter of fact
> I myself do structures that remain undisclosed. You can never force the
> crystallographic community as a whole to deposit all their data. Having said
> this, of course the published structures should also be available to the
> scientific community, but crystallographic data in this respect is no
> different than data on gene sequences, expression constructs etc. It is the
> responsibility of every individual journal that data which is published is
> also reproducible and verifiable. The PDB cannot force journal editors to
> force authors to submit their data upon submitting a manuscript, although I
> would applaud the editors that do request all info. We could, as peer
> reviewers, refuse structure papers when we cannot verify claims due to lack
> of data, this would probably be the best way to go about this.
>
> Flip
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ccp4bb@dl.ac.uk [mailto:owner-ccp4bb@dl.ac.uk]On Behalf Of
> David J. Schuller
> Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2003 16:08
> To: CCP4 bulletin board
> Subject: Re: [o-info] Re: [ccp4bb]: [SUMMARY]: Problems with PDB entry
> 1muo
>
>
> *** For details on how to be removed from this list visit the ***
> *** CCP4 home page http://www.ccp4.ac.uk ***
>
> On Thu, 24 Apr 2003, N.Ramasubbu wrote:
>
> > Here is a simple solution.
>
> Here is another simple solution, although I suspect most will consider it
> to be on the harsh side. If an author writes something in an article
> which is untrue, such as "these coordinates have been deposited in the
> data bank" for the purpose of being able to publish their work, they
> should be held accountable for it. Since their ability to publish affects
> their ability to get funding, they have in effect lied for profit. They
> could be prosecuted for fraud.
>
> Cheers,
>
> =======================================================================
> "Spontaneity is only a term for man's ignorance of the gods." - Samuel
> Butler
> =======================================================================
> David J. Schuller
> modern man in a post-modern world
> MacCHESS, Cornell University
> djs63@cornell.edu
>
>
~~~~~~~~~
--
Miguel Ortiz Lombardía
email: mol@ysbl.york.ac.uk
http://www.ysbl.york.ac.uk/~mol
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Quand la verité n'est pas libre, la liberté n'est pas vraie.
Jacques Prévert