Civility in scientific publishing: The glyphosate paper

In recent years, we have witnessed a decline in civility in the public arena when various socially sensitive issues are being presented. Those of us engaged in the publishing of scientific papers and in our comments on these papers, need to be cognizant of the social graces, courteous demeanor, and chivalry. Debates are essential to our learning and in being able to ferret out the essentials of various scientific issues that are of value. Because of the amount of time and effort connected with analyzing the complex problems and the years invested in such endeavors, we often resort to the behavior, that is, contentious and at times even quite insulting to our opponents during our defense. This is the part of human nature but as civilized human beings, we must strive to maintain the courtesy and a calm demeanor during such discussions and debates. I have yielded to such temptations myself but am striving to repent of my sins. The medical and scientific history should have taught us that in defending our ideas we learn and sometimes come to the realization that our paradigm or hypothesis is wrong, either in part or whole. Such debates allow us to fine tune our ideas and correct our errors in thinking, which are easily, consciously, or subconsciously sublimated by our enthusiasm. The glyphosate papers presented ideas that, while well supported by the scientific studies and logical conclusions, also contained some possible errors in its suppositions. Dr. Miguel Faria challenged some of these concepts and was met with some degree of derision by one of the authors. This editorial comment is in response to these issues.