Sign in

Jana Christopher

@image-integrity.bsky.social
883 followers 190 following 19 posts

Image Data Integrity Analyst FEBS Press

PostsRepliesMedia
Reposted by Jana Christopher
Ian Hussey @ianhussey.mmmdata.io · 09/04/2026
Many folk are surprised to discover thay Risk of Bias assessment tools tend not to interrogate the question “Did this study actually happen? And are its results trustworthy enough to believe?” Jack’s Cochrane endorsed INSPECT-SR checks have done a lot to mainstream such Trustworthiness Assessment.
33412
Reposted by Jana Christopher
Elisabeth Bik @elisabethbik.bsky.social · 03/05/2026
The workshop is opened by @image-integrity.bsky.social, who stresses the importance of images as data in scientific papers, shares some data from the STM workshop about microscopy metadata, and shows several images with integrity issues. ImageTwin and Proofig tools are useful. #WCRI2026
1161
Reposted by Jana Christopher
Dalmeet Singh Chawla @dalmeet.bsky.social · 24/04/2026
'$1,000 for first author': Study of paper mill adverts reveals cost of buying authorship on dodgy scientific papers. My latest for @cenmag.bsky.social: cen.acs.org/policy/publi... @abalkina.bsky.social, @reeserichardson.bsky.social, @image-integrity.bsky.social, @jabyrnesci.bsky.social
cen.acs.org
Around $1,000 can buy you first authorship on a dodgy scientific paper
Cost varies across paper mills, but the least expensive one is in India, according to a new analysis of social media advertisements
099
Jana Christopher @image-integrity.bsky.social · 07/04/2026
Two days to go until our STM webinar Thursday April 9, with Nathalie Gaudreault, Steven West, Marie Soulière and myself. We will explore practical ways to improve how image data and metadata are handled in research and publishing. There's still time to register! stm-assoc.org/events/from-...
000
Reposted by Jana Christopher
Thomas Gerdes @thomasgerdes.de · 06/03/2026
„Die Daten fließen nur in eine Richtung, nämlich von der Wissenschaft zu Elsevier“ – Yuliya Fadeeva zum Datentracking durch Verlage #DataTracking #ScientificPublishing irights.info/artikel/date...
irights.info
Datentracking bei Elsevier: Yuliya Fadeeva im Interview
Das wissenschaftliche Publikationswesen ist fest in der Hand einiger Großverlage. Als Data Analytics-Firmen spionieren sie Forschende aus.
031
Reposted by Jana Christopher
Olivia Guest · Ολίβια Γκεστ @olivia.science · 07/03/2026
got inspired by some questions from phd students the other day — and also really irritated by senior academics who seem to refuse to get the issues and continue to blame students; hope useful for you! 🩷 olivia.science/cheating
olivia.science
Why does cheating matter?
A personal anecdote and an appeal to junior colleagues.
313842
Reposted by Jana Christopher
Jennifer Byrne @jabyrnesci.bsky.social · 07/03/2026
Join us at #WCRI2026 for a networking session for anyone working on #PaperMills and #GenAI on the context of #ResearchIntegrity. There'll be lightning talks, networking and probs drinks/ dinner afterwards. May 4, 6.00-7.30 pm, all welcome!
media.tenor.com
a man wearing glasses and a black shirt that says may 4 on it
ALT: a man wearing glasses and a black shirt that says may 4 on it
1117
Reposted by Jana Christopher
Julia M. Rohrer @dingdingpeng.the100.ci · 09/02/2026
iDiv Leipzig is organizing a symposium for early career researchers from all fields interested in scientific integrity & reproducibility. Some good stuff, e.g.: @haesleinhuepf.bsky.social on generative AI for science, @rmcelreath.bsky.social on a guerilla approach to scientific workflow.>
23018
Reposted by Jana Christopher
Pedro Beltrao @pedrobeltrao.bsky.social · 21/11/2025
I tried an even harder example on Gemini Pro image generation and this is quite scary/amazing. I asked for a microscopy image of around 20 HeLa cells, GFP tagged 20% nuclear, 10% membrane, +1 nuclear staining, + overlap. Image below and prompt in the following post.
87035
Reposted by Jana Christopher
STM @stmassoc.bsky.social · 05/11/2025
Heading to Innovation & Integrity Days? Don’t miss the 9 Dec #ResearchIntegrity workshops: expert-led, interactive & focused on practical skills. --> Forensic Scientometrics --> Collaboration with Institutions --> Supporting Editors & Reviewers Join us! stm-assoc.org/events/stm-i... #STMinLondon
Promotional graphic for STM’s Innovation & Integrity Days Research Integrity Workshops on 9 December. The design features three workshop topics: 1) Forensic Scientometrics – Enhancing Research Integrity and Security for the Scholarly Ecosystem, 2) Communication and collaboration with Institutions, and 3) Helping your editors and reviewers understand research integrity issues. Text highlights that the workshops are new this year. Bright gradient background with STM and I&I Days branding.
151
Reposted by Jana Christopher
STM @stmassoc.bsky.social · 05/11/2025
@hkoers.bsky.social @image-integrity.bsky.social @tonyhopedale.com @danielacuna.bsky.social
001
Reposted by Jana Christopher
Richard Sever @richardsever.bsky.social · 26/10/2025
"By inventing fake scientists, paper mills can create a ready supply of publications and favourable peer reviews, ensuring more of the mills’ submissions get published [and] increase[d] credibility for paying customers" www.nature.com/articles/d41...
nature.com
How to spot fake scientists and stop them from publishing papers
Journals are considering doing identity checks to expose fake authors — but there are downsides.
072
Reposted by Jana Christopher
Bohdan Pavuk @bpavuk.neocities.org · 26/12/2024
if you see this post, your actions are: - if you have a spare buck, give it to Wikipedia, then repost this - if you don't have a spare buck, just repost your action is mandatory for the world's best source of information to survive
2612716035199
Reposted by Jana Christopher
COSIG @cosig.net · 17/10/2025
COSIG has a new landing page! Check it out at cosig.net. (Files for COSIG are still hosted on OSF!)
The new landing page for COSIG, available at cosig.net.

It reads:

Anyone can do post-publication peer review.
Anyone can be a steward of the scientific literature.
Anyone can do forensic metascience.
Anyone can sleuth.

However, investigating the integrity of the published scientific literature often requires domain-specific knowledge that not everyone will have. This open source project is a collection of guides written and maintained by publication integrity experts to distribute this domain-specific knowledge so that others can participate in post-publication peer review.

COSIG currently hosts 31 guides and was last updated on 25 September 2025. Guides can be downloaded as individual PDFs. A combined PDF with all guides included can be downloaded here.
1127
Reposted by Jana Christopher
Xavier Lasauca Cisa @xavierlasauca.bsky.social · 22/09/2025
Can we measure trust in scientific publications?, via @lseimpactblog.bsky.social blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsoci... #AcademicPublishing #Expertise #OpenResearch
blogs.lse.ac.uk
Can we measure trust in scientific publications? - Impact of Social Sciences
Jonathon Alexis Coates outlines how a constellation of static and dynamic indicators could provide a means for assessing the trustworthiness of published research
031
Reposted by Jana Christopher
Cheshire @thatsregrettab1.bsky.social · 27/08/2025
Adam @clearskiesadam.bsky.social brought this post to my attention and he does a good job of explaining the weaknesses and strengths in the current state of GenAI detection in the text of papers. clearskiesadam.medium.com/genai-detect...
clearskiesadam.medium.com
GenAI detection that actually works
Clear Skies is making genAI detection with Pangram available to subscribers in Oversight.
053
Reposted by Jana Christopher
Jennifer Byrne @jabyrnesci.bsky.social · 19/08/2025
A paper that combines #peerreview & cheese... what could be better? Answer: writing said paper with @abalkina.bsky.social @image-integrity.bsky.social & Marie Souliere. Read on to learn how the Swiss Cheese Model could help peer review & #researchintegrity onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/...
onlinelibrary.wiley.com
Rethinking Peer Review Using the Swiss Cheese Model to Better Flag Problematic Manuscripts
Click on the article title to read more.
12615
Reposted by Jana Christopher
Serhii Nazarovets @serhiinazarovets.bsky.social · 05/08/2025
A powerful new study, Richardson et al. @pnas.org reveals the scale of systematic research fraud: fake papers are doubling every 1.5 years - ten times faster than real science! Retractions and deindexing can't keep up: 📄 doi.org/10.1073/pnas... #ResearchFraud #Integrity #PaperMills #AcademicEthics
Annual global scientific activity captured by WoS as measured by the number of actively publishing journals, the number of journals deindexed annually by WoS, the number of journals with retractions, the number of journals with PubPeer comments, and the number of journals with suspected paper mill products. It is visually apparent that deindexing now occurs at a level far below the level of occurrence of journals publishing suspected paper mill products. These patterns hold for Scopus and MEDLINE.

R.A.K. Richardson, S.S. Hong, J.A. Byrne, T. Stoeger,

& L.A.N. Amaral, The entities enabling scientific fraud at scale are large, resilient, and growing rapidly, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 122 (32) e2420092122, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2420092122 (2025).
051
Reposted by Jana Christopher
Brian Nosek @briannosek.bsky.social · 04/08/2025
Reese and colleagues are doing incredibly important work to identify large scale credibility challenges for the research literature. The latest report is disquieting.
0207
Reposted by Jana Christopher
Reese Richardson @reeserichardson.bsky.social · 04/08/2025
Today, our article "The entities enabling scientific fraud at scale are large, resilient, and growing rapidly" is finally published in PNAS. I hope that it proves to be a wake-up-call for the whole scientific community. reeserichardson.blog/2025/08/04/a...
reeserichardson.blog
A do-or-die moment for the scientific enterprise
Reflecting on our paper “The entities enabling scientific fraud at scale are large, resilient, and growing rapidly”
9348207
Reposted by Jana Christopher
Dorothy Bishop @deevybee.bsky.social · 04/08/2025
hot off the press: huge infestation of crooked editors involved on paper mills unmasked. www.pnas.org/doi/abs/10.1...
1217
Reposted by Jana Christopher
Retraction Watch @retractionwatch.com · 01/08/2025
Once upon a time, two science journalists had an idea for a blog about retractions. And on Aug. 3, 2010, Retraction Watch launched. And now, 15 years and 6,700 posts later, that work seems more important than ever. Happy 15th anniversary, Retraction Watch.
retractionwatch.com
Happy 15th anniversary, Retraction Watch
Once upon a time, a long time ago, two science journalists had an idea for a blog about retractions. And on Aug. 3, 2010, Retraction Watch launched, detailing in the first post why retractions matt…
624885
Reposted by Jana Christopher
Lonni Besançon @lonnibesancon.bsky.social · 26/07/2025
La haine et véhémence de mes harceleurs (qui prouvent malgré le point exact de l'article) est l'un des premiers moteurs de: - ma motivation à ne pas flancher face à la mauvaise science - mais aussi de la réussite de cet article (nature.com/articles/d41...) 🤣 Changez rien :)
nature.com
The COVID-19 pandemic transformed this scientist into a research-integrity sleuth
Lonni Besançon has faced online abuse, threats and legal challenges. But he remains proud of his service to science and society.
1318
Reposted by Jana Christopher
Laborjournal @laborjournal.bsky.social · 24/07/2025
#PaperMills fälschen in großer Zahl Forschungsarbeiten. Wie sehr schadet diese Schattenindustrie dem #Wissenschaftssystem? Wie kann man ihre Methoden erkennen und sie stoppen? – Thema eines Essays von @abalkina.bsky.social‬ und @image-integrity.bsky.social‬: www.laborjournal.de/rubric/essay...
Screenshot aus dem im Post verlinkten Artikel. Darauf zu sehen: Überschrift "Kommerzialisierung wissenschaftlichen Fehlverhaltens und die Herausforderung von Paper Mills in der Forschung", darfunter Autorinnenzeile "Von Anna Abalkina & Jana Christopher, Berlin", wiederum darunter Vorspann mit dem Text: "Paper Mills produzieren in großer Zahl gefälschte Forschungsarbeiten – oft unterstützt durch KI. Wie groß ist das Ausmaß dieser Schattenindustrie? Welche Spuren hinterlässt sie im wissenschaftlichen System? Und welche Gegenstrategien braucht es, um ihre Methoden zu erkennen und sie zu stoppen?" Angeschnitten dann die ersten Sätze des Artikeltexts. Auf der rechten Seite ein KI-generiertes Aufmacherfoto von vielen Papierlappen, die zum Trocknen in langer Reihe von der Decke hängen.
243
Reposted by Jana Christopher
Charles Piller @charlespiller.bsky.social · 16/07/2025
Interesting look at the enormity of the paper mill problem, via @abalkina.bsky.social @image-integrity.bsky.social www.laborjournal.de/rubric/essay...
laborjournal.de
Kommerzialisierung von Paper Mills
Autorschaft als Währung: Wie Paper Mills mit gekauften Co-Autorschaften, manipuliertem Peer-Review und KI-Fälschungen die Wissenschaft unterwandern und kommerzielle Betrugsnetzwerke die Forschung gefä...
021
Reposted by Jana Christopher
Anna Abalkina @abalkina.bsky.social · 15/07/2025
Jana Christofer and I wrote a piece on #papermills for Laborjournal. We discuss challenges of paper mills and AI for scientific publishing. Science needs immediate solutions to correct it and prevent it from massively produced fraud. @image-integrity.bsky.social www.laborjournal.de/rubric/essay...
12410
Reposted by Jana Christopher
Reese Richardson @reeserichardson.bsky.social · 10/07/2025
This piece nicely summarizes the situation and features thoughts from @elisabethbik.bsky.social, @mumumouse2.bsky.social, @davidsanderssci.bsky.social, @image-integrity.bsky.social and myself.
131
Jana Christopher @image-integrity.bsky.social · 01/07/2025
Great piece from Renee Hoch and Joanna Clarke. „It is likely not a coincidence that in the genAI era publishers are seeing an increase in large-scale publication ethics issues, including peer review integrity rings, authorship integrity issues and paper mills“
020
Jana Christopher @image-integrity.bsky.social · 17/06/2025
Amazing talk this morning by Hub Zwart ‘Trust in science in an era of social fragmentation’ @EMBLEvents #SciSoc2025
022
Jana Christopher @image-integrity.bsky.social · 16/06/2025
The great Prof Csaba Szabo speaking now about the reproducibility crisis #SciSoc2025
100
Jana Christopher @image-integrity.bsky.social · 16/06/2025
Good morning! Looking forward to two days at EMBL, starting today: EMBL Science and Society Conference: In science we trust? @EMBLEvents #SciSoc2025
021
Reposted by Jana Christopher
Ian Hussey @ianhussey.mmmdata.io · 11/06/2025
@cosig.net coverage in Nature news! Collection of Open Science Integrity Guides Anyone can do post-publication peer review. Anyone can be a steward of the scientific literature. www.nature.com/articles/d41...
nature.com
How to spot suspicious papers: a sleuthing guide for scientists
An open collection of tips and tools could help researchers and publishers to pick up on problematic research.
2179
Reposted by Jana Christopher
Nature @nature.com · 10/06/2025
A group of research-integrity experts has launched a toolkit for researchers that outlines how to spot suspicious scientific papers. go.nature.com/43U32fj
go.nature.com
How to spot suspicious papers: a sleuthing guide for scientists
An open collection of tips and tools could help researchers and publishers to pick up on problematic research.
07927
Reposted by Jana Christopher
COSIG @cosig.net · 04/06/2025
Anyone can do post-publication peer review. Anyone can be a steward of the scientific literature. Anyone can do forensic metascience. Anyone can sleuth. That's why we are launching COSIG: the Collection of Open Science Integrity Guides, an open source resource for all of the above. cosig.net
COSIG logo:
COSIG (Collection of Open Science Integrity Guides)

Now available at cosig.net!
410158
Reposted by Jana Christopher
Jennifer Byrne @jabyrnesci.bsky.social · 26/05/2025
"A literature that's ...polluted with junk is not only no good to anyone, it's a source of real harm, and it lends itself to ... bad-faith attacks on scientific research in general... We need to speak up more about this situation and we need to start cleaning house more vigorously" #Papermills 🧪
05728
Reposted by Jana Christopher
Ashutosh Ghildiyal @ashutoshg.bsky.social · 12/05/2025
What do you think? Is/ should Gatekeeping be the core of scholarly publishing? My new article published in Scholarly Kitchen: scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2025/05/12/g... #ScientificPublishing #AcademicSky #PeerReview #AI #ScholarlyPublishing
scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org
Guest Post - Gatekeepers of Trust: Reaffirming the Publisher's Role in Service of the Reader - The Scholarly Kitchen
The most vital and enduring contribution of scholarly publishers is their role as gatekeepers — not as obstacles to knowledge but as stewards of quality, integrity, and trust.
021
Reposted by Jana Christopher
Dave Barry @david-j-barry.bsky.social · 08/05/2025
The do’s and don’ts of scientific image editing. I think this one paragraph covers about 90% of the queries we get on this kind of stuff. www.nature.com/articles/d41...
Many aspects of editing are common sense, says Jana Christopher, an image-integrity analyst at the Federation of European Biochemical Societies, who is based in Heidelberg, Germany. For instance, it’s OK to increase the image’s contrast so that a cell or feature pops out against the background, but the background still has to be visible. Altering brightness or saturation is also acceptable as long as the modification is applied equally across the whole image. Cropping is fine if the process doesn’t remove elements that would change the interpretation of the image — after all, Christopher notes, selecting a particular field of view under the microscope is in itself a form of cropping and selective reporting. “The bottom line is that the images need to represent accurately what was observed experimentally,” she says.
062
Reposted by Jana Christopher
Lex Bouter @lexbouter.bsky.social · 13/11/2024
"...our current inability to flag erroneous publications quickly and at scale ... results in the research literature representing an ... unsafe workplace." www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.108… @WCRIFoundation @C0PE @peerrevcongress @RetractionWatch...
144
Reposted by Jana Christopher
Elisabeth Bik @elisabethbik.bsky.social · 30/04/2025
The do’s and don’ts of scientific image editing Acceptable image-editing practices are partly a matter of common sense. But researchers say journals and funders could help scientists by standardizing policies. @sarareardon.bsky.social reports www.nature.com/articles/d41...
nature.com
The do’s and don’ts of scientific image editing
Acceptable image-editing practices are partly a matter of common sense. But researchers say journals and funders could help scientists by standardizing policies.
418859
Reposted by Jana Christopher
Anna Lipphardt @anneli17.bsky.social · 04/04/2025
Freiburg, Germany, Central Station Bookshop (right @the center of the shop‘s entryway): “This is a selection of books which are banned at schools in the US“. #UniteAgainstBookBans #FreedomToRead @ala-pla.bsky.social @librarypolicy.bsky.social
Fotograph shows a table with covers of books translated into German:
back row: 5 books by Sarah J. Maas
middle row: Toni Morrison, Bluest Eyes; Steven Chbosky, The Perks of Being a Wallflower; Orwell, 1984; Sara Gruen, Water for Elephants;
Front row: Jay Asher, 13 Reasons Why; Sherman Alexie, The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian; Art Spielman, Complete MAUS; Margaret Atwood, The Handmaid‘s Tale; John Green, For Alaska.
20669841995
Reposted by Jana Christopher
Richard Unwin @rdunwin.bsky.social · 31/03/2025
OpenAI-generated western blots? And we thought that photoshopping data was bad. This is going to be very hard to pick up... 😟
92915
Reposted by Jana Christopher
Cheshire @thatsregrettab1.bsky.social · 04/04/2025
Unlike Oncotarget and American Journal of Cancer Research whose editors (like @weldeiry.bsky.social) complain about the “weaponizing” of @pubpeer.com, @febspress.bsky.social @image-integrity.bsky.social and @tandfresearch.bsky.social take their work seriously. 👏
133
Reposted by Jana Christopher
Elisabeth Bik @elisabethbik.bsky.social · 01/04/2025
Now on arXiv: @deadneanderthals.bsky.social's preprint on paper mill contamination in @tandfresearch.bsky.social's journal Bioengineered. An analysis of 878 papers, of which 226 (25.7%) were identified as problematic. That is a lot! arxiv.org/abs/2503.21267
Text from the screenshot, same as found on https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.21267

"Tackling paper mills requires us to prevent future contamination and clean up the past -- the case of the journal Bioengineered
Rene Aquarius, Elisabeth M. Bik, David Bimler, Morten P. Oksvold, Kevin Patrick
Introduction: Taylor & Francis journal Bioengineered has been targeted by paper mills. The goal of this study is to identify problematic articles published in Bioengineered during the period 2010 to 2024.
Methods: Dimensions was used to search for articles that contained the terms mouse OR mice OR rat OR rats in title or abstract, published in Bioengineered between January 1st 2010 to December 31st 2024. All articles were assessed by eye and by using software to detect inappropriate image duplication and manipulation. An article was classified as problematic if it contained inappropriate image duplication or manipulation or had been previously retracted. Problematic articles were reported on PubPeer by the authors, if they had not been reported previously. All included articles were assessed for post-publication editorial decisions.
Results: We have excluded all articles published in 2024 from further analysis, as these were all retraction notices. We assessed the remaining 878 articles, of which 226 (25.7%) were identified as problematic, of which 35 had been previously retracted. One retracted article was later de-retracted. One article received a correction. None of the included articles received an expression of concern or the Taylor & Francis under investigation pop-up.
Conclusions: Taylor & Francis lack of editorial action has left the scientific community vulnerable to reading and citing hundreds of problematic articles published in Bioengineered. To uphold scientific integrity, Taylor & Francis should use the findings of this study as a starting point to systematically identify all compromised articles in Bioengineered and take appropriate editorial action."
16927
Jana Christopher @image-integrity.bsky.social · 31/03/2025
This is fantastic 😃
000
Reposted by Jana Christopher
Lisa Spitzer @lspitzer.bsky.social · 26/03/2025
The second day of the Cochrane Symposium is opened by Jana Christopher @image-integrity.bsky.social talking about image integrity, paper mills, and the influence of AI. #OpenScience
021
Reposted by Jana Christopher
Reese Richardson @reeserichardson.bsky.social · 10/03/2025
Our SEM preprint has been updated. Link in thread. Among new revelations, we found that electrochemistry articles that misidentify the SEM instrument used in the study are more likely to make a fundamental error in the characterization of a material's electrical properties. #PaperMills
A figure from https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/4wqcr_v2.

Figure 6: Assessment of Tauc plots in articles flagged by our pipeline. a, the mockup Tauc plot on the
left demonstrates how to correctly estimate band gap energy (by taking the intersection of the plots
linear fit with the y ≡ (αhν)1/γ = 0 line) (Makuła et al., 2018). The mockup Tauc plot on the right
demonstrates a common error where the band gap is estimated by taking the intersection of the linear
fit with the line y = ymin where ymin is the lowest value on the y-axis as plotted. b, this specific error
occurred more frequently on articles with misidentified SEM instruments than other MSE articles.
Errors bars show ±1 standard error of the proportion. n.s. = p > 0.05, * = p < 0.05, ** = p < 0.01
and *** = p < 0.001 by two-sided Z-test of proportions.
121
Reposted by Jana Christopher
Dorothy Bishop @deevybee.bsky.social · 22/02/2025
thanks to @solalpirelli.bsky.social for this nice piece on pseudoscience published by IEEE - and the need for the publisher to step up to the plate and start retracting this garbage if they want to retain any credibility. deevybee.blogspot.com/2025/02/ieee...
deevybee.blogspot.com
IEEE Has a Pseudoscience Problem
Guest post by Solal Pirelli The IEEE, full name Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, is one of the main scientific publisher...
36236
Jana Christopher @image-integrity.bsky.social · 09/03/2025
Oi…!! That’s my slide, ask me next time before posting please? And yes, seriously this is a genuine excuse we received.
120
Jana Christopher @image-integrity.bsky.social · 27/02/2025
I'm chuffed, spoke on BBC Radio4 today 😊 about AI generated images in scientific papers www.bbc.com/audio/play/m...
bbc.com
BBC Audio | BBC Inside Science | AI in Science: Promise and Peril
Google has launched a new AI tool called Co-Scientist. How good is it?
1132
Reposted by Jana Christopher
Kim Eggleton @eggletonkim.bsky.social · 24/02/2025
“Regardless of style and tactics, everyone in the American scientific community must hold to the principles of independence, peer evaluation, and inclusion. ... We will not turn our backs on them now.” www.science.org/doi/10.1126/...
science.org
Come together, right now
The chaos, conflicting information, firings, and hurtful rhetoric of the Trump administration’s approach to science over the past month are causing anxiety, grief, and concern for the scientific commu...
032