Preprint bans, previously unknown ancient humans and funders suppress research results

Fossil DNA hints at the mysterious Toalean

This 7,000-year-old skeleton is a juvenile hunter-gatherer from Sulawesi, Indonesia, and may be the first remains discovered by a mysterious ancient culture called the Toria
.

In 2015, people discovered a basically complete Stone Age female fossil in a limestone cave.
She was about 18 years old
.

DNA extracted from the skull shows that she shares a common ancestor with the New Guineans and the indigenous peoples of Australia, as well as the extinct ancient human Denisovans
.

Adam Bloom, an archaeologist at the Australian Centre for the Study of Human Evolution at Griffith University in Brisbane, said: "This is the first time anyone has discovered ancient human DNA in that area
.

The author said that she may be a member of the Toalean people.
We know their existence from very little archaeological evidence, such as chipped stone tools, and they are believed to have lived in Sulawesi at about the same time
.

Archaeologist Simone Keeley of the Australian National University in Canberra agrees that the remains were discovered with the help of Torian tools, providing a link between the woman and these little-known people.
Provided strong evidence
.

The pre-press ban was considered "ridiculous"

Australia’s major research funders ruled that more than 30 scholarship applications were not eligible because they provided preprints and other materials that were not peer-reviewed, sparking strong protests from scientists who believed the move was a blow to open science.
And will hinder career development
.

As the COVID-19 pandemic makes the use of preprints mainstream, the researchers stated that the position of the Australian Research Council (ARC) restricts applicants’ ability to cite the latest research and is out of touch with modern publishing practices, and is incompatible with allowing or encouraging the use of preprints.
The overseas funding agencies of the printed copies are also inconsistent
.

Researchers expressed anger on Twitter, calling the general ruling "shortsighted", "ridiculous", "cruel", "amazing", "outdated" and "heart-wrenching
.

Nick Enfield is a linguistic anthropologist at the University of Sydney.
He is currently funded by ARC.
He believes that this decision is unreasonable and unethical
.

ARC did not answer a specific question from Nature magazine on its reasons for excluding preprints, nor did it confirm how many applicants were considered ineligible as a result, but a spokesperson said that the rule “ensures that all applications are treated equally.
” And added that "eligibility issues may arise in many ways
.

In a tweet on August 30, ARC responded to the complaint, saying that it had "started a fast review" of its policies
.

Funders instead pressure researchers to suppress their research results

A survey of public health researchers found that there were countless examples of suppressed test results on topics such as nutrition, sexual health, physical activity, and drug use.

The survey involved 104 researchers from North America, Europe, and Oceania, who led trials to evaluate behavioral interventions designed to improve public health outcomes

Public health research has a history of industrial interference, so the author, under the leadership of Sam McCrabb of the University of Newcastle in Australia, expects that industry-funded research will be the most affected

During the investigation, investigators were asked whether they encountered repression, from requesting changes to methods or changing conclusions to requesting postponement or non-publication of results

The authors found that respondents were most likely to report pressure from government funders seeking to influence research results
.