Search

The presence of pharmaceuticals in the environment, especially the aquatic environment, has received a lot of attention in the last 20 plus years. Despite that attention, the two most important questions regarding pharmaceuticals in the environment still cannot be answered. It is not possible to put the threat posed by pharmaceuticals into perspective with the many other threats (stressors) facing aquatic organisms, such as low flows due to over-abstraction of water, inhibited passage of migratory species due to dams and weirs, diseases, algal blooms causing low oxygen levels and releasing toxins, eutrophication, climate change, and so on. Nor is it possible to identify which pharmaceuticals are of concern and which are not. Not only can these key questions not be answered presently, they have received extremely little attention, despite being identified 10 years ago as the two most important questions to answer. That situation must change if resources and expertise are to be effectively used to protect the environment.

It is unusual, and can be difficult, for scientists to reflect in their publications on any limitations their research had. This is a consequence of the extreme pressure that scientists are under to ‘publish or perish’. The inevitable consequence is that much published research is not as good as it could, and should, be, leading to the current ‘reproducibility crisis’. Approaches to address this crisis are required. Our suggestion is to include a ‘Limitations’ section in all scientific papers. Evidence is provided showing that such a section must be mandatory. Adding a ‘Limitations’ section to scientific papers would greatly increase honesty, openness and transparency, to the considerable benefit of both the scientific community and society in general. This suggestion is applicable to all scientific disciplines. Finally, we apologise if our suggestion has already been made by others.

It is unusual, and can be difficult, for scientists to reflect in their publications on any limitations their research had. This is a consequence of the extreme pressure that scientists are under to 'publish or perish'. The inevitable consequence is that much published research is not as good as it could, and should, be, leading to the current 'reproducibility crisis'. Approaches to address this crisis are required. Our suggestion is to include a 'Limitations' section in all scientific papers. Evidence is provided showing that such a section must be mandatory. Adding a 'Limitations' section to scientific papers would greatly increase honesty, openness and transparency, to the considerable benefit of both the scientific community and society in general. This suggestion is applicable to all scientific disciplines. Finally, we apologise if our suggestion has already been made by others.