Scientists claim that ‘ghetto code’ in medical research ‘is not scientific’

The journals Nature and Cell have published ruminations by prominent scientists about the plastic-inflated envelope that serves as a best-seller in the world of biomedical research. It’s known as the Omicron Prompt, or OPR,…

Scientists claim that ‘ghetto code’ in medical research ‘is not scientific’

The journals Nature and Cell have published ruminations by prominent scientists about the plastic-inflated envelope that serves as a best-seller in the world of biomedical research. It’s known as the Omicron Prompt, or OPR, and is often used in laboratories to keep costs down. The scientific term is “coded,” a term synonymous with the OPR that the BBC reported last year on the “gold standard” within academic circles.

However, various top-tier researchers have told Quartz that the OPR contains a tiny glitch that fundamentally undermines some of the basic scientific concepts that it is designed to impart. They say the alert and acknowledgment notices that the OPR produces “are not scientific” and are (some scientists believe) open to abuse.

In a recent talk at the 2016 Laureate Colloquium organized by the Frost Science Library in the United Kingdom, Professor Wayne Wong, one of the few U.S. genetics researchers to publicly write about the issue, predicted that the global scientific community would coalesce around a new protocol for the OPR, which could also prove vexing to the OPR’s commercial customers.

“The pro and con against the OPR ‘code’ could turn into a semantic war,” he said.

Read the full story at Quartz.

Related

Colonial manuscripts and the battle for manuscripts’ loyalty

The evolution of the ‘string theory’

How could scientists ‘weaponize’ fake anthrax?

Leave a Comment