I bet there is a higher incidence of readers of Nature that were born genetically predisposed to being smarter. I suppose that's "a disadvantage to those without access."
'Doping' refers to the use of performance-enhancing substances or methods in scientific research, which can lead to false or exaggerated results.
The science journal likely conducted a survey or study on its readership to determine the percentage of individuals who admitted to using performance-enhancing substances or methods in their research.
'Doping' can greatly compromise the validity and reliability of scientific research, as it can lead to inaccurate or biased results. This can ultimately harm the progress and credibility of the scientific community.
While there is limited data on the prevalence of 'doping' in the scientific community, it is believed to be a relatively common practice, especially in highly competitive fields. However, it is important to note that not all individuals who 'dope' may be aware that their methods are unethical or harmful.
Some measures that can be taken to prevent 'doping' in scientific research include implementing strict ethical guidelines and regulations, increasing transparency and accountability in research methods, and promoting a culture of integrity and honesty in the scientific community.