Whioce Journals

Limited reproducibility of preclinical data is increasingly discussed in the literature. Failure of drug devel-opment programs due to lack of clinical efficacy is also of growing concern. The two phenomena may share an important root cause — a lack of robustness in preclinical research. Such a lack of robustness can be a relevant cause of fail-ure in translating preclinical findings into clinical efficacy and hence attrition, and exaggerated cost in drug develop-ment. Apart from the study design and data analysis factors (e.g., insufficient sample sizes, failure to implement blind-ing, and randomization), heterogeneity among experimental models (e.g., animal strains) and the conditions of the study used between different laboratories is a major contributor to the lacking of robustness of research findings. The flipside of this coin is that the understanding of the causes of heterogeneity across experimental models may lead to the identification of relevant factors for defining the responder populations. Thus, this heterogeneity within preclinical find-ings could be an asset, rather than an obstacle, for precision medicine. To enable this paradigm shift, several steps need to be taken to identify conditions under which drugs do not work. An improved granularity in the reporting of preclini-cal studies is central among them (i.e., details about the study design, experimental conditions, quality of tools and rea-gents, validation of assay conditions, etc.). These actions need to be discussed jointly by the research communities in-terested in preclinical data robustness and precision medicine. Thus, we propose that a lack of robustness due to the heterogeneity across models and conditions of the study is not necessarily a liability for biomedical research but can be transformed into an asset of precision medicine

Bespalov, Anton

Emmerich, Christoph H

Gerlach, Björn

Michel, Martin C

Reproducibility of preclinical data: one man's poison is another man's meat

Environment and Social Psychology is launched as a policy, practice and research platform to encourage environmental consciousness that promotes rights of, and justice for, all including environment itself. The challenges ahead are clear. The stated mission and objectives define a paradigmatic sphere where we wish to explore, disseminate, and innovate

Mohan, Brij

  
Editorially Speaking. © 2016 Brij Mohan. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribu-
tion-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), permitting all non-commercial use, distribution, and 
reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.  
1 
EDITORIAL 
Editorially Speaking 
Editor-in-Chief: Brij Mohan 
Dean Emeritus, School of Social Work, 
Louisiana State University, 
Baton Rogue, LA 70803, USA  
Email: brijmohan128@gmail.com 
http://dx.doi.org/10.18063/ESP.2016.01.009. 
 
 
nvironment and Social Psychology is launched 
as a policy, practice and research platform to 
encourage environmental consciousness that 
promotes rights of, and justice for, all including envi-
ronment itself. The challenges ahead are clear. The 
stated mission and objectives define a paradigmatic 
sphere where we wish to explore, disseminate, and 
innovate. 
 Environment is the womb of global well-being. 
Human-social development and societal productivity 
and co-existential obligations call for dialogues, dis-
courses, and understanding that insure human survival 
beyond the rhetoric of sustainability. 
 This premier volume offers a few glimpses of 
the good nexus, a symbiotic interface that welds na-
ture and humans in varied spheres of life. It is only a 
small step. It is my privilege to thank our Board of 
Editors — a phalanx of scholars from various coun-
tries and cultures — distinguished contributors, re-
viewers and subscribers who have helped me and 
Whioce Publishing to launch this journal for the future 
of this civilization. Actor Leonard DiCaprio, “man of 
the world”, couldn’t be more eloquent when he says, 
“It was an eye-opening experience. We’re absolutely 
digging our ecological grave” (Parade, January 10, 
2016: 10–11). Briefly stated, six articles presented 
here offer certain perspectives. 
 In the first article I seek to reinvent a mantra — 
bio-global civility — that offers pathways to achieving 
a dynamic relationship between man and environment. 
This posits environment as an inclusive-integrative 
phenomenon both challenged and cultivated by what 
Chinese call eco-civilization. It’s not enough, as Pope 
Francis would have you believe, to protect ‘the rights 
of environment’. Man and environment have a mutu-
ally dualist—combative-supportive—interface. Scien-
tists, psychologists and public leaders ought to trans-
form this uncertain confluence into a positive, symbi-
otic, co-existential partnership, which I call a Good 
Nexus. 
 Alex Epstein tries to answer the question “Why is 
it so difficult to confront the social environment”, us-
ing the world famous Pussy Riot case for such analy-
sis. Taking into account historical and political reasons, 
as well as the masses’ psychological fears, attitudes 
and expectations, he explains why radical cul-
tural/artistic activism, that occupied the stage almost 
everywhere in the West during the last century, is per-
ceived as illegitimate by a vast majority of population 
in Russia. His conclusion is that social environmental 
issues should be taken into account by both the artists 
themselves and their supporters: in those patriarchic 
societies, where public life is strongly influenced by 
religious axioms, innovative radical cultural projects 
practically have no chance to provoke social change. 
 There is no end of the crisis in sight, contends Pe-
ter Hermann. Even more, the long nightmare of forc-
ing Greece onto its knees during the first half of 2015, 
using banks instead of tanks, shows the contempt for 
mankind by established superior powers when it 
comes to defending their interest in a Hobbesian war, 
irrespective of subsequent human tragedies. A more 
detailed and radical analysis is needed, allowing a 
change of the structures underlying the current situa-
tion. One point in question is that the European trag-
edy was and is part of a global drama. The discussion 
E 
Editorially Speaking — A Foreword from the Editor 
 
2 Environment and Social Psychology (2016)–Volume 1, Issue 1 
of main paradigms as growth, nationality, statehood 
and the like have to be at the heart of any debates, 
questioning their validity. A radical shift is needed, 
aiming at a proactive and provocative re-interpretation 
of the future. 
 Vijay P. Singh’s (and his co-author’s) study exam-
ines the impacts caused by climate change on the hy-
drologic cycle and discusses their repercussions for 
the society. It also provides suggestions that may be 
relevant for redefining policies aiming to improve 
water security at local and global levels. In his words: 
“Natural disasters, such as floods, droughts, extreme 
rainfall, extreme snowfall, earthquakes, forest fires, 
hurricanes, tsunamis, tornadoes, heat waves, extreme 
cold weather, wind storms, and health epidemics seem 
to occurring only too frequently these days. Often, 
climate change is being alleged to be the cause of 
these disasters”. This question arises: Is it really so? 
The answer to this question is neither unequivocally 
yes nor unequivocally no. Regardless, climate change 
is certainly having an impact on these disasters and 
impacts virtually every facet of society-scientific, 
technological, environmental, ecological, social, cul-
tural, economic, and political. Can humans escape the 
psychological ramifications of these transformations? 
 Manohar Pawar postulates a social development 
approach for the comprehensive development of dis-
aster-affected areas, including addressing environ-
mental and psychosocial issues. As disasters, whether 
human made or natural, are more frequently occurring, 
it is important to prepare well to face them and im- 
plement a comprehensive recovery and reconstruction 
plan to ensure the well-being of all, particularly the 
most vulnerable and needy groups. 
 Philip Young Hong’s paper examines the psycho-
logical empowerment process for jobseekers with 
physical disabilities on their quest toward the eco-
nomic self-sufficiency outcome. Highlighting the 
strength of human agency to impact social environ-
ment, this transformative process—described as psy-
chological self-sufficiency—involves moving from 
the state of barrier-filled impossible realities to hope-
ful ones that allow the goals to be possible. This 
switch from barriers to hope is not only what makes 
individuals with physical disabilities to reach the 
economic self-sufficiency outcomes through employ-
ment but also that allows for new systems to emerge 
helping sustain the reinvigorated motivations. The 
ripple effects from individual activation in workforce 
development, particularly for those with physical dis-
abilities, could create the opportunity structure that 
nurtures human-centered employer and workplace 
cultural development. 
 The tipping point of sustainable growth has passed. 
It’s time to move beyond. Every time a child is shot, a 
civil airplane is downed, a woman is sexually abused 
and mayhem is perpetrated, humanity confronts its 
own nemesis. Isn’t it an implicit plea for bio-global 
civility? Environment and Social Psychology is an 
open forum to examine the banality of some formula-
tions. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 


Not a member yet

Reproducibility of preclinical data: one man's poison is another man's meat

Editorially Speaking

338

342