Nicole C. Nelson
@nicolecnelson.bsky.social
Science & Technology Studies | History of Sci/Tech/Med | Qualitative Metascience | Medical Humanities.
Associate Prof at UW Madison.
🇨🇦 living in the 🇺🇸 married to a 🇩🇪.
Associate Prof at UW Madison.
🇨🇦 living in the 🇺🇸 married to a 🇩🇪.
Yep, Harald has taken up both bike watching and sourdough making over the past few years... middle age comes for us all 😂
October 31, 2025 at 2:04 PM
Yep, Harald has taken up both bike watching and sourdough making over the past few years... middle age comes for us all 😂
Happy to... I will get in touch over email!
August 18, 2025 at 7:25 PM
Happy to... I will get in touch over email!
I am happy to help with building a repository of oral histories, if folks are interested! I have an open human subjects protocol they could be collected under. @stuartbuck.bsky.social's post is also a good example of a self-archiving model for personal histories: bit.ly/4oESiL5
August 18, 2025 at 6:35 PM
I am happy to help with building a repository of oral histories, if folks are interested! I have an open human subjects protocol they could be collected under. @stuartbuck.bsky.social's post is also a good example of a self-archiving model for personal histories: bit.ly/4oESiL5
Thanks for the shout out @scurry.bsky.social!
August 8, 2025 at 1:59 PM
Thanks for the shout out @scurry.bsky.social!
Really sorry to have missed your panel... unfortunately my talk was scheduled at the same time!
July 3, 2025 at 11:22 AM
Really sorry to have missed your panel... unfortunately my talk was scheduled at the same time!
Her talk was 🔥🔥🔥
July 2, 2025 at 2:21 PM
Her talk was 🔥🔥🔥
We Canadians should all find each other for Canada day drinks!
July 1, 2025 at 4:43 PM
We Canadians should all find each other for Canada day drinks!
Wanaka Suzuki has a nice article on Japanese practices around research animals in SSS! journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1...
Improvising care: Managing experimental animals at a Japanese laboratory - Wakana Suzuki1, 2021
Japanese scientists and technicians are expected to adhere to international standards of humane animal experimentation, but their understandings of human-animal...
journals.sagepub.com
June 11, 2025 at 1:43 PM
Wanaka Suzuki has a nice article on Japanese practices around research animals in SSS! journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1...
This depressing thought is perhaps my sign to now get off social media and go to the gym! 😂
May 29, 2025 at 11:36 PM
This depressing thought is perhaps my sign to now get off social media and go to the gym! 😂
Maybe @briannosek.bsky.social is right that we just have to embrace the chaos, but I find myself leaning more towards @avastmachine.bsky.social 's view that "hypertransparency" could be paralyzing for the scientific system as it currently exists (and which I very much want to survive!)
May 29, 2025 at 11:29 PM
Maybe @briannosek.bsky.social is right that we just have to embrace the chaos, but I find myself leaning more towards @avastmachine.bsky.social 's view that "hypertransparency" could be paralyzing for the scientific system as it currently exists (and which I very much want to survive!)
I am with you in worry ❤️ And to argue against myself @avastmachine.bsky.social's work on climate science shows at least a few hopeful case where adversarial data collection/reanalysis does at least somewhat quell disputes between skeptics and mainstreamers: www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/oa-...
Knowledge infrastructures under siege | 2 | Climate data as memory, tr
Both trust in climate knowledge and the truth it delivers descend from the organizational routines and truces necessary to share and maintain climate data.
www.taylorfrancis.com
May 29, 2025 at 11:22 PM
I am with you in worry ❤️ And to argue against myself @avastmachine.bsky.social's work on climate science shows at least a few hopeful case where adversarial data collection/reanalysis does at least somewhat quell disputes between skeptics and mainstreamers: www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/oa-...
Oh, I definitely don't think that restricted access is the right solution, but I also don't think that data no longer matters. I've been really convinced by Becky Mansfield's analysis of the first Trump EPA, curious to hear what you think of it! journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/...
Deregulatory science: Chemical risk analysis in Trump’s EPA - Becky Mansfield, 2021
While critics cast the Trump administration as anti-science, requiring in response vigorous defense of science, analysis of the Trump EPA reveals instead a stra...
journals.sagepub.com
May 29, 2025 at 11:11 PM
Oh, I definitely don't think that restricted access is the right solution, but I also don't think that data no longer matters. I've been really convinced by Becky Mansfield's analysis of the first Trump EPA, curious to hear what you think of it! journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/...
I don't disagree with you... EOs like this could be used to exclude! But the historian in me sees a longer pattern where commentators tend to point out the "shutting down" risks and not their inverse. @naomioreskes.bsky.social's 2018 piece is another example: www.nature.com/articles/d41...
Beware: transparency rule is a Trojan Horse
Like tobacco lobbyists and climate-change deniers, the US Environmental Protection Agency is co-opting scientific trappings to sow doubt, warns Naomi Oreskes.
www.nature.com
May 29, 2025 at 10:36 PM
I don't disagree with you... EOs like this could be used to exclude! But the historian in me sees a longer pattern where commentators tend to point out the "shutting down" risks and not their inverse. @naomioreskes.bsky.social's 2018 piece is another example: www.nature.com/articles/d41...
Yep, I agree... IMHO it's expedient but unprincipled to try to shut down policy debates by excluding studies or people from the debate, but I have deep worries about what we do with the chaos that could ensue from that kind of true openness.
May 29, 2025 at 10:25 PM
Yep, I agree... IMHO it's expedient but unprincipled to try to shut down policy debates by excluding studies or people from the debate, but I have deep worries about what we do with the chaos that could ensue from that kind of true openness.
Yeah, the so-called Shelby amendment, which made access to research data produced with federal funding available via FOIA request, is named after Alabama Republican Senator Richard Shelby. It was a response to Harvard's refusal to give access to an important data set. An uncomfortable history :-/
May 29, 2025 at 10:19 PM
Yeah, the so-called Shelby amendment, which made access to research data produced with federal funding available via FOIA request, is named after Alabama Republican Senator Richard Shelby. It was a response to Harvard's refusal to give access to an important data set. An uncomfortable history :-/
Yep, in the preprint linked about we talk about access to two key studies (Harvard's Six Cities study and the American Cancer Society's CPS-II study) that have been the subject of decades long access disputes and the basis for important PM2.5 air pollution regulation
May 29, 2025 at 9:59 PM
Yep, in the preprint linked about we talk about access to two key studies (Harvard's Six Cities study and the American Cancer Society's CPS-II study) that have been the subject of decades long access disputes and the basis for important PM2.5 air pollution regulation
You can read more here about this history and my take (along with my excellent students @bennettmcintosh.com and Kelsey Ichikawa) on why adjudicating between competing analyses is likely to be difficult, time consuming work: osf.io/preprints/me...
OSF
osf.io
May 29, 2025 at 9:45 PM
You can read more here about this history and my take (along with my excellent students @bennettmcintosh.com and Kelsey Ichikawa) on why adjudicating between competing analyses is likely to be difficult, time consuming work: osf.io/preprints/me...
Calling the Trump EO "fool's gold" and the like may feel like a pithy way of maintaining a preserve of "genuine" open science advocacy, but this boundary making is exactly the kind of exclusionary practice that has galvanized dissident scientists and motivated them to keep showing up.
May 29, 2025 at 9:41 PM
Calling the Trump EO "fool's gold" and the like may feel like a pithy way of maintaining a preserve of "genuine" open science advocacy, but this boundary making is exactly the kind of exclusionary practice that has galvanized dissident scientists and motivated them to keep showing up.
The difference is important because access to data is increasing with or without the specific laws/policies that Republicans have championed. Adversarial reanalysis is likely to become more of a feature of our scientific/political landscape, and we don't have great tools to deal with it.
May 29, 2025 at 9:37 PM
The difference is important because access to data is increasing with or without the specific laws/policies that Republicans have championed. Adversarial reanalysis is likely to become more of a feature of our scientific/political landscape, and we don't have great tools to deal with it.