Rigor Mortis: How Sloppy Science Creates Worthless Cures, Crushes Hope, and Wastes Billions in Science and Inquiry

From the Bookshelf of Science and Inquiry…

Rigor Mortis: How Sloppy Science Creates Worthless Cures, Crushes Hope, and Wastes Billions

Richard F. Harris

Start date: January 1, 2019

Finish date: January 31, 2019

Discussion: Book Club 2019

Find A Copy At

Libraries

Group Discussions About This Book

Showing 2 of 26 topics — 448 comments total

Book Club 2019

December 2019 - Uninhabitable Earth
By Betsy , co-mod · 8 posts · 108 views

last updated Dec 21, 2020 08:09AM

November 2019 - Invisible Women
By Betsy , co-mod · 17 posts · 122 views

last updated Oct 18, 2020 06:07PM

showing 5 of 5 topics view all »

What Members Thought

Jan 25, 2019 David Rubenstein rated it really liked it

Shelves: medicine, science

The title of this book Rigor Mortis is not about the death of humans, but is about the death of rigor in science, specifically, medical science and biochemistry. This book goes into considerable detail, about why so many research studies are not reproducible.

According to the book, the wasteful use of money to generate useless, incorrect, unreproducible research is a major contributor to the problem. The reasons are varied. One is that academia encourages publication of incremental, insignifican ...more

30 likes · Like · see review

Jan 05, 2019 aPriL does feral sometimes rated it it was amazing

Shelves: favorites, academic-notations, science, very-very-disturbing-to-me, non-fiction, twisted-me-peculiar

'Rigor Mortis' is written by Richard Harris, a three-time winner of the AAAS Science Journalism Award. The book is a general survey of common research practices which are not being followed, or of research practices which are being followed despite proven shortcomings, by many scientists and laboratories conducting biomedical studies. This book pulls together in one place a lot of disparate information which has been printed here and there, off and on, in the previous few decades. His book is fo ...more

23 likes · Like · see review

Jan 17, 2019 Jim rated it really liked it · review of another edition

Shelves: 1audio, 2non-fiction, science

I'm intrigued & aghast by this book. I thought the results of biomedical experiments I read in Science, Nature, or other journals were accurate. Maybe not. There's a huge percentage that rely on experiments that aren't repeatable &, for the most part, the current system doesn't care. Scientists, especially at the universities, have to publish. Literally, they're often (usually?) judged on the number of published papers, not on the quality. Worse, retractions often aren't published, so the papers I'm intrigued & aghast by this book. I thought the results of biomedical experiments I read in Science, Nature, or other journals were accurate. Maybe not. There's a huge percentage that rely on experiments that aren't repeatable &, for the most part, the current system doesn't care. Scientists, especially at the universities, have to publish. Literally, they're often (usually?) judged on the number of published papers, not on the quality. Worse, retractions often aren't published, so the papers are continually referenced by researchers who believe them to be true. For instance, one paper on vitamin E helping with some forms of cancer has long been debunked, but it's still being used & cited.

Money is a huge factor, especially how it is portioned out. It's a madhouse that encourages positive results at the cost of good science. Worse, there aren't good guidelines for experimentation nor are methods required to be shared. At first blush, not sharing methods doesn't seem like a big deal, but it is. This is cutting edge science that pushes the limits of tools & it's been found that different test tubes or mixing methods can make an experiment unrepeatable.

I never would have thought of cells changing so much due to their environment, but I've read enough on evolution that I should have. Everyone should have & yet cell cultures often aren't tested. The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks has contaminated many cultures.
Her cells are extremely robust & often show up as the sample for colon or breast cancer cells.
Apparently contamination is incredibly easy & rampant.

I'm aghast at the sloppy experiments, although it is understandable in some cases. The bit about how the way they mixed solutions (shaken rather than stirred) completely changing test results is a good example. Another is the difference between top & bottom shelf mice. The top shelf mice are exposed to more light & noise which stresses them more. That in turn can dramatically change how hardy they are. Other practices are less understandable. Not using blind sampling techniques to stop bias or tailoring results is just wrong, but when money & jobs are on the line, even good scientists can do bad things.

All in all, this was eye-opening & shameful. We can & should do better than this. There are many working to correct the problem, but they're fighting against entrenched systems. My biggest takeaway from this book is that I'll never believe another study until I see at least a couple more that agree with it & even then I'll take it with a grain of salt until it has an established track record. Actually, that's pretty much the way I've always been, but I'm even more wary now.

I highly recommend this, but it might ruin your faith in medicine. It was a little more repetitive than I prefer, but it can get pretty technical at times so that wasn't always a bad thing. ...more

16 likes · Like · see review

Mar 16, 2024 CatReader rated it it was amazing

Shelves: cc, cnet, no-audiobook, 5-star-books, best-of-2024

As a physician, scientist, and past recipient of NIH funding, I think this book is crucial reading for scientists in general, especially trainees aiming for a biomedical research career (undergrads, grad students, and postdocs). While I am a strong proponent of NIH, NSF, and other discretionary government funding of biomedical research, it's also crucial to realize why so much published research doesn't hold up to scrutiny and time, to inoculate oneself against the common pitfalls that make this ...more

3 likes · Like · see review