Build a solid foundation in science, formulation and product development—find out more!
Most Popular in:
Is Cosmetic Science Really "Bad"? Part II: Detecting Baloney Science
By: Johann W. Wiechers, PhD, JW Solutions
Posted: August 25, 2009
page 5 of 5
Sometimes, reviewers have personal reasons for rejecting a paper; for example, when they work on the same subject as the author. Also, many papers are rejected simply because they do not offer novel information--the majory of cosmetic science papers are more descriptive than explanatory, and while it may not always be novel, that does not make it bad science. Within the limited pages of a printed journal, however, it may not offer interesting new reading material and therefore it is not published.
Regarding Shermer's third question, this author can only conclude that the cosmetics industry is not any better or any worse than other industries involving commercial science. Three of the ten characteristics differentiating good from bad science have been reviewed here. In this author's view, the cosmetics industry scores neutral on the first question, below average on the second question, and neutral again on the third question.
Again, Goldacre has a point but there are seven more characteristics to be discussed before it can be determined whether cosmetic scientists are as bad as they are portrayed. Read C&T Today in September for the next installment of this series.
Prof. Johann W. Wiechers, PhD
Independent consultant for cosmetic science, JW Solutions
Scientific advisor, Cosmetics & Toiletries magazine
Gasthuispolderweg 30, 2807 LL Gouda
Cosmetic Science Exposed, Wiechers' Style
Memories of a Cosmetically Disturbed Mind is a timely manifesto of what our industry is meant to represent. Whether you agree or disagree with Johann Wiechers' views on the state of the global cosmetic industry, this book will blow your scientific mind! Johann is no longer here with us, but he left us much to think about.Order Today at Alluredbooks-Cosmetic Science