• 72 Posts
  • 298 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 5th, 2023

help-circle






  • Fra artiklen:

    Den 12. september 2011 blev der skrevet Danmarkshistorie.

    Her blev der nemlig taget det første danske fix i et fixerum – det vil sige et rum, hvor stofbrugere kan indtage deres stoffer lovligt og under opsyn af personale, der står klar til at hjælpe.

    Siden er der åbnet fem danske stofindtagelsesrum, hvor man altså ikke blot fixer, men også ryger stoffer: To i København og et i henholdsvis Aarhus, Odense og Vejle.

    Men fem er ikke nok, påpegede statsminister Mette Frederiksen (S) i sin åbningstale i Folketinget tirsdag:

    »Vi vil gerne afsætte penge til flere. Til at udvide de nuværende stofindtagelsesrum, længere åbningstider, flere pladser og til at oprette nye i andre danske byer.«

    Både dansk og udenlandsk forskning peger på, at det på mange områder er gavnligt med flere stofindtagelsesrum.

    »Man skal tænke det som mere end bare et sted, hvor man tager stoffer. Det kan være en slags ‘servicehub’, hvor nogle af samfundets mest udsatte kan møde og bruge sundhedsvæsenet og andre services såsom stofbehandling, som de ellers har svært ved uden for de her faciliteter.«

    »Men de må helst ikke blive for store. For vi ved fra vores forskning, at det kan blive hektisk og ligefrem voldeligt, når der er for mange forskellige stofbrugere,« forklarer Esben Houborg, der er lektor ved Center for Rusmiddelforskning ved Aarhus Universitet.













  • No, that’s not what I said. You’re right that journals, to some extent, also lends credibility to the publication, but it’s not the source of credibility. What I said was that an article published in Nature will have many more views than an article published on a random WordPress blog.

    Again, saying that researchers “agree to have it that way” ignores the structural difficulty of changing the system by the individual. The ones who benefit the most from changing the system are also the ones most dependent on external funding - that is, young researchers. Publishing in low-impact journals (ones that has a small outreach such as most open-access journals) makes it much harder to apply for funding



  • There are several benefits, but compared to WordPress, I guess the biggest one is outreach: no one will actually see an article if it’s published by a young researcher that hasn’t made a name for themselves yet. It will also not be catalogued and will therefore be more difficult to find when searching for articles.

    Also, calling researchers “whipped” is a bit dismissive to the huge inertia there is in the realm of scientific publication. The scientific journal of Nature was founded in 1869, but general open-access publishing has only really taken off in the last decade or so.


  • You will transfer the economic copyright to most journals upon publication of the typeset manuscript meaning that you’re not allowed to publish that particular PDF anywhere. However, a lot of journals are okay with you publishing the pre-peer reviewed article or even sometimes the peer-reviewed, but NOT typeset article (sometimes called post-print article). Scientific publishing is weird :-)