labscheeren.bsky.social
LightNews LightNews
labscheeren.bsky.social
@labscheeren.bsky.social
37 followers 90 following 15 posts
Posts Replies Media Videos
To the unknown reviewer who wrote “It is difficult to assess if there is any risk,
as a lab technician can do the work.” Dont behave like an asshat. Labs are run on technician. The are the core and can spearhead risky and novel projects….
December 16, 2025 at 3:17 PM
Reposted by labscheeren.bsky.social
ishier.bsky.social
Nice preprint from @derm-scientist.bsky.social! Ubiquitin system is key for tissue architecture in CYLD cutaneous syndrome (CCS) skin tumours.
"Comparative ubiquitinomics of human skin reveals insulin receptor ubiquitination as a regulator of collagen secretion."
www.biorxiv.org/content/10.6...
December 8, 2025 at 5:49 PM
Reposted by labscheeren.bsky.social
sandradehaan.bsky.social
😯 Artikel dat glyfosaat veilig verklaarde is teruggetrokken.
Vijfentwintig jaar lang functioneerde het als een anker voor de stelling dat glyfosaat en Roundup bij regulier gebruik veilig zijn voor de mens.
De auteurs bleken echter te zijn ondersteund door Monsanto. www.foodlog.nl/artikel/arti...
Artikel dat glyfosaat veilig verklaarde is teruggetrokken
De bekende glyfosaat-review uit 2000 van Gary Williams, Robert Kroes en Ian Munro onder de titel Safety Evaluation and Risk Assessment of the Herbicide…
www.foodlog.nl
December 1, 2025 at 7:06 AM
Reposted by labscheeren.bsky.social
cyrilpedia.bsky.social
The two original research papers, Masamichi et al showing that AID deficient B cells were deficient in both class switch recombination and somatic hypermutation

www.cell.com/AJHG/fulltex...
Class Switch Recombination and Hypermutation Require Activation-Induced Cytidine Deaminase (AID), a Potential RNA Editing Enzyme
Induced overexpression of AID in CH12F3-2 B lymphoma cells augmented class switching from IgM to IgA without cytokine stimulation. AID deficiency caused a complete defect in class switching and showed...
www.cell.com
November 26, 2025 at 6:04 PM
New study alert with a smart hardworking PhD student Anneloes vd Plas and many fun collaborators such Beltman lab, Sharp lab and kaspar Bresser!
Pyroglutamation of cell surface proteins CD47 and TRP1 by glutaminyl cyclase modulates therapeutic antibody binding
Communications Biology - Pyroglutamation, a post-translational modification induced by glutaminyl cyclase, can modulate the binding affinity of therapeutic antibodies, as demonstrated for targets...
eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com
November 13, 2025 at 7:44 PM
Reposted by labscheeren.bsky.social
pengzell.bsky.social
Pushing for open access is not enough. We need a push to end profit.
hansonmark.bsky.social Mark A. Hanson @hansonmark.bsky.social · Nov 11
We wrote the Strain on scientific publishing to highlight the problems of time & trust. With a fantastic group of co-authors, we present The Drain of Scientific Publishing:

a 🧵 1/n

Drain: arxiv.org/abs/2511.04820
Strain: direct.mit.edu/qss/article/...
Oligopoly: direct.mit.edu/qss/article/...
A table showing profit margins of major publishers. A snippet of text related to this table is below. 1. The four-fold drain 1.1 Money Currently, academic publishing is dominated by profit-oriented, multinational companies for whom scientific knowledge is a commodity to be sold back to the academic community who created it. The dominant four are Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley and Taylor & Francis, which collectively generated over US$7.1 billion in revenue from journal publishing in 2024 alone, and over US$12 billion in profits between 2019 and 2024 (Table 1A). Their profit margins have always been over 30% in the last five years, and for the largest publisher (Elsevier) always over 37%. Against many comparators, across many sectors, scientific publishing is one of the most consistently profitable industries (Table S1). These financial arrangements make a substantial difference to science budgets. In 2024, 46% of Elsevier revenues and 53% of Taylor & Francis revenues were generated in North America, meaning that North American researchers were charged over US$2.27 billion by just two for-profit publishers. The Canadian research councils and the US National Science Foundation were allocated US$9.3 billion in that year. A figure detailing the drain on researcher time. 1. The four-fold drain 1.2 Time The number of papers published each year is growing faster than the scientific workforce, with the number of papers per researcher almost doubling between 1996 and 2022 (Figure 1A). This reflects the fact that publishers’ commercial desire to publish (sell) more material has aligned well with the competitive prestige culture in which publications help secure jobs, grants, promotions, and awards. To the extent that this growth is driven by a pressure for profit, rather than scholarly imperatives, it distorts the way researchers spend their time. The publishing system depends on unpaid reviewer labour, estimated to be over 130 million unpaid hours annually in 2020 alone (9). Researchers have complained about the demands of peer-review for decades, but the scale of the problem is now worse, with editors reporting widespread difficulties recruiting reviewers. The growth in publications involves not only the authors’ time, but that of academic editors and reviewers who are dealing with so many review demands. Even more seriously, the imperative to produce ever more articles reshapes the nature of scientific inquiry. Evidence across multiple fields shows that more papers result in ‘ossification’, not new ideas (10). It may seem paradoxical that more papers can slow progress until one considers how it affects researchers’ time. While rewards remain tied to volume, prestige, and impact of publications, researchers will be nudged away from riskier, local, interdisciplinary, and long-term work. The result is a treadmill of constant activity with limited progress whereas core scholarly practices – such as reading, reflecting and engaging with others’ contributions – is de-prioritized. What looks like productivity often masks intellectual exhaustion built on a demoralizing, narrowing scientific vision. A table of profit margins across industries. The section of text related to this table is below: 1. The four-fold drain 1.1 Money Currently, academic publishing is dominated by profit-oriented, multinational companies for whom scientific knowledge is a commodity to be sold back to the academic community who created it. The dominant four are Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley and Taylor & Francis, which collectively generated over US$7.1 billion in revenue from journal publishing in 2024 alone, and over US$12 billion in profits between 2019 and 2024 (Table 1A). Their profit margins have always been over 30% in the last five years, and for the largest publisher (Elsevier) always over 37%. Against many comparators, across many sectors, scientific publishing is one of the most consistently profitable industries (Table S1). These financial arrangements make a substantial difference to science budgets. In 2024, 46% of Elsevier revenues and 53% of Taylor & Francis revenues were generated in North America, meaning that North American researchers were charged over US$2.27 billion by just two for-profit publishers. The Canadian research councils and the US National Science Foundation were allocated US$9.3 billion in that year. The costs of inaction are plain: wasted public funds, lost researcher time, compromised scientific integrity and eroded public trust. Today, the system rewards commercial publishers first, and science second. Without bold action from the funders we risk continuing to pour resources into a system that prioritizes profit over the advancement of scientific knowledge.
November 12, 2025 at 7:54 AM
Reposted by labscheeren.bsky.social
oscarkocken.bsky.social
De superrijken maken de niet-rijken graag wijs dat iedereen ooit superrijk kan worden en dat het daarom niet in je eigen belang zou zijn om superrijken meer te belasten.

Maar je gáát niet zo superrijk worden. En je leven gaat wél beter worden als het geld van de superrijken beter verdeeld wordt.
September 8, 2025 at 7:14 PM
nos.nl/l/2581625. My involvement in the early phase of this antibody has been very rewarding. It show how basic science can be translated into therapies that make a real difference, and finally also in NL
nos.nl
September 8, 2025 at 6:54 AM
Reposted by labscheeren.bsky.social
suzannekroger.bsky.social
#rechtopdenacht
August 21, 2025 at 7:52 PM
Reposted by labscheeren.bsky.social
speld.nl
Israël hoopt na moord op Palestijnse journalist eindelijk af te zijn van alle negatieve beeldvorming
Israël hoopt na moord op Palestijnse journalist eindelijk af te zijn van alle negatieve beeldvorming
Afgelopen zondagnacht heeft het Israëlische leger prominent Al Jazeera-journalist Anas al-Sharif vermoord, samen met vier andere medewerkers van het nieuwsnetwerk.
speld.nl
August 12, 2025 at 6:47 AM
Reposted by labscheeren.bsky.social
odedrechavi.bsky.social
Tomorrow at 19:30 a huge demonstration in Tel Aviv - The Israeli Academia demands to end the war NOW. These horrors are unbearable and must stop.
July 23, 2025 at 3:31 PM
Reposted by labscheeren.bsky.social
faunabescherming.bsky.social
Afgelopen jaren ging het bij schapenhouders over de hele lengte van de Geniedijk keer op keer mis met loslopende honden
www.nhnieuws.nl/nieuws/34733...
Schapenslachtpartij is druppel voor hobbyboer Adrie: "Die honden moeten aan de lijn!"
Hobbyboer in Vijfhuizen verliest drie schapen door aanvallen van loslopende hond. Schapenhouders eisen actie van gemeente voor betere maatregelen op de Geniedijk.
www.nhnieuws.nl
April 4, 2025 at 8:03 PM
Reposted by labscheeren.bsky.social
vogelbeschermingnl.bsky.social
Wauw! Een #brileider op Texel! Niemand had ooit gedacht dat dat zou gebeuren. De brileider broedt het verst weg van allemaal, in Alaska en Oost-Siberië en is alleen ooit in Lapland en Spitsbergen gezien. Onze collega Ruud van Beusekom woont op Texel en maakte deze geweldige foto. 🤩
January 14, 2025 at 5:48 PM
Reposted by labscheeren.bsky.social
oscarkocken.bsky.social
Breaking
January 9, 2025 at 8:10 PM
Proefdier gebruik. Iets waar we goed over na moeten denken. Ook dat er 1000x meer dieren geslacht worden voor consumptie (en export daarvan).

Om echt minder dierproeven te doen, is meer vertrouwen nodig in de alternatieven www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2024/... www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2024/...
Om echt minder dierproeven te doen, is meer vertrouwen nodig in de alternatieven
Alternatieven: Proeven op dieren zijn soms wettelijk verplicht. Maar de weerstand tegen proefdiergebruik groeit. Kan het zonder?
www.nrc.nl
December 7, 2024 at 8:12 PM