This phenomenon is currently being discussed in both the print media and various political magazines on television. Just recently, there was a report on ARD that can still be accessed in the media library (https://www.tagesschau.de/inland/fakescience-101.html). A truly worth seeing documentary and really unbelievable what can be seen and heard there – I am still stunned.
I often refer to scientific studies in my texts – studies are the basis for me for a reasonable discourse and for rational decisions. The results of studies determine what is fact and what rather belongs to the realm of imagination. The scientific experiment is the basis – anyone who has not experimentally proven their assertions – and with honest and transparent methods – should not go public with hypotheses.
But probably it was only a matter of time before “alternative facts” in times of Donald Trump and fake news “infect” science as well. I feel sick when I see how ingenious companies publish data for appropriate payment that have not been checked for plausibility in any way. These pseudo-scientific publishers (often from the Asian region) disregard every basis of scientific quality assurance – anyone can publish there whatever they want, no matter how nonsensical it may be.
Why scientists betray their principles and use these platforms instead of strictly boycotting such developments is something I find hard to understand. In any case, the existence of such pseudo-journals undermines trust in independent and reputable science – and this in turn gnaws at the foundations of our society. After all, how can laypeople still trust in the face of such proceedings that science provides a guide that one can rely on.
“Fake Science” becomes a problem especially when it comes to issues of high societal relevance – e.g. studies on climate change or the importance of smoking for health. When interest groups can buy credibility with the help of pseudoscientific publishers in order to undermine truths with this pseudoscience, we all have a problem.
For the MS-DocBlog and its contained health information, I once again guarantee at this point that I only refer to sources and studies that have been created under the strict rules of scientific quality assurance. It is an absolute concern of mine that you find information here on which you can rely – but you must also endure that I criticize findings that have not been created with serious methods (see contribution to the Coimbra Protocol), no matter how beautiful they may be…
