According to a Nature editorial, the long-respected scientific journal Nature seems to be awakening. It states that Nature journals have raised the bar for gender reporting in research. Authors will be asked to give details about how sex was considered in study design.
The editorial mentions that certain journals have “encouraged” reporting about sex/gender “for years”, but they cited insufficient data reporting on both sex/gender — as though the two were different.
The editorial continues under the heading “Accounting to sex and gender makes science better”:
The participants will be required to give data that is gender- and sex-disaggregated, and they will be informed of their consent to share and report individual-level data. These changes will apply to studies that involve human participants, other vertebrates, or cell lines in which sex is a relevant consideration.
A further four journals, Nature Communications, Nature Medicine, Nature Communications and Nature Metabolism, will raise awareness about the new recommendations starting in June. This is done to increase understanding of how gender and sex reporting are already part of research design, data collection, and analysis in journals that publish them. Journals will also assess the reception of changes by authors and reviewers so that we can improve upon them as we gain experience.
The editorial mentions drug studies and even admits to the narrative of gender identity activists when it says that those studies have different effects on men and women.
Debra Soh is a sex neuroscientist and host of The Dr. Debra Soh Podcast. She also wrote The End of Gender: Debunking Myths About Sex and Identity in Our Society.
Nature said that studies should recognize sex and sex, and that sex is a biological attribute and gender is socially constructed. Some intersex people and transgender people identify more with opposite sex than their birth sexuality. However, this is due to biological influences such as prenatal hormonal exposure. Why can’t transgender people feel comfortable in their birth sex if gender is a social construct?
While being open to minorities’ concerns is a good thing, it doesn’t make any sense to rewrite science to include 0.8% of the population. Scientists are being hampered by activists’ ideologies that seperate gender and sex.
Soh said that she was “saddened by academia being “debased”, putting “threats, deceit” above “knowledge, understanding” and that science cannot be regained once trust is lost.
