One overarching problem facing global scientific research communities today is that too many research projects produce results that don't seem to be reproducible, thereby failing a basic tenet of science. If someone publishes a study saying that alcoholic housecats grossly overestimate their leaping abilities compared to non-alcoholic cats, then one should be able to reproduce the same study and see the same antic results, right? The stakes are far higher, of course, if the results cover the efficacy of a new cancer drug or stem cell treatments, as they often do.

Get the full story

This story is free
for registered users

Registering provides access to this and other free content.

Register now.

Already have an account?
Login Now.

The Seattle Times writes that pharmacogenomics testing can help choose medications that may work best for people with depression.

Researchers report that deleting one gene from butterflies affects their wing coloration patterns, according to the Washington Post.

In PNAS this week: genome sequencing of weevil symbionts, retinoid X receptor deletion in lung cancer metastasis, and more.

Sequencing could help combat foodborne illnesses, according to a blog post by Food and Drug Administration officials.