One of the last bastions of truth, scientific research is finally bowing down to the long arm of the United Nations (UN). Last month a new ethics guidance by one of the world’s major scientific research publications was issued to bring it in line with the UN Human Declaration of Rights.
Nature Human Behaviour (nature.com) published its new guidance document on the publication of scientific research. In it they have stated that they will no longer publish science studies if there is “potential harms for human population groups who do not participate in research but may be harmed by its publication”. The guidance further cites as an example “Gender” refers to a set of cultural norms and expectations and not a “biologically defined variable”.
Scientific research is being censored if the results might create harm to the current narrative is what it boils down to. It is hard to believe that scientific research is being edited to fit a cuddly, inclusive view of the world. Since when did truth worry about the ability of anyone to receive it?
Also, what defines harm? Is it harmful to publish a study which shows that black populations suffer more vaccine injuries than their Caucasian brothers? Is it harmful to publish research that finds that boys are four times more likely to develop autism than girls. Is it harmful to publish a study that finds a link between transgender identity and hormones introduced through the environment during pregnancy?
The list of potentially “harmful” research findings is purely subjective and should not be imposed on an objective discipline such as scientific research.
EDITOR: Just speechless
