Who is to blame for irreproducibility?

“Blame It On The Antibodies” <— click here to link to article

This article highlights the controversy behind the irreproducibility of antibody research and how the use of one antibody over another can affect the outcome of an experiment. I really don’t understand how this is something that still exists in this day and age where science has progressed rapidly, becoming more accurate, faster, and precise. Yet, we have not been able to resolve this gray area of consistency and accuracy of antibodies.

One thing I battled with when thinking about this topic is who carries the blame when the antibody research is irreproducible. Should the blame be placed on the scientist who assumed that the antibody would work on its intended target or should the blame be placed on the company who sold a product that simply did not work?

Companies should be held accountable when it comes to the distribution of products intended for scientific research point blank, especially in the scope of research where peoples’ livelihood is at stake and the price is high.  At the same time, the reality of the situation is that knockoffs are everywhere and we should be protecting ourselves from them.

Thus, it should be the duty of the scientist to ensure that experiments are being conducted accurately and test the question at hand. How can you assure the validity and accuracy of an experiment if you don't first test the validity and accuracy of the antibody? At the same time, that scientist paid for a convenient and accurate product and that is what they should receive-a product that works upon arrival.

I guess my biggest turmoil with the controversy behind irreproducibility in science is how do we deliver blame? How do we identify where or at what point the scientific integrity of the experiment gave way? Before we can even address this problem to fix it, we would have to choose where the blame lies: the company, the scientist, or even the more complicated both.