Thread by @BugQuestions

Scientists make their living using their brains to interpret data.

So what happens when that organ breaks, and a respected researcher becomes mentally ill?

In this week's second #DeepDive, let's explore the case of Jay Traver.

CW: Mental illness

Jay Traver was one of the early entomological pioneers. Her career centered mainly around aquatic insects, specifically mayflies.

Most of her work-which is still cited to this day-revolved around describing the lifecycles of mayflies.

In 1951, Traver published a paper where she claimed to have experienced an infestation by a mite called Dermatophagoides scheremetewskyi.

This is a mite which lives in homes, and although it causes allergic reactions, it was known at the time to not be parasitic.

We all have similar species in all of our homes. If you look closely at your vacuum bags, you'll see mites which kind of look like the ones below.

These are dust mites. Very common in the environment.

flic.kr/p/8ZKkgE

The paper itself is really worth a read. Her description of the condition, and her attempts at treatment, are all incredibly detailed.

It's worth noting that she used about a dozen different treatments, many of which can cause skin irritation alone.

pdfs.semanticscholar.org/12f9/b262b99d0…

This sort of condition is actually familiar to entomologists. It's called Eckbom's syndrome, or sometimes, 'delusory parasitosis'.

It's a condition which makes people believe they're invested with parasites.

This condition is not well studied. People who have it move frequently, go to many different doctors, and tend to not stick with treatment regimens.

It's accepted that about 25,000 people in the US have this condition, although the numbers are likely much higher.

Traver's 1951 paper is important because it's considered the best first-person account of the illness.

Her case is also pretty standard. A disproportionate amount of people with this condition are middle-aged or older, and female.

Traver's account of her condition is undeniably important, but her observations are faulty. Beyond that, there's proof of harm because it's been used to support the claim that these mites are parasitic.

So it should be retracted, right?

Well, there's problems with that, too.

Mental disorders of various types are not uncommon in the scientific world.

Autism spectrum disorders are not uncommon (@Stylopidae is diagnosed), and depression is also pretty common.

So it's unethical to say that mental disorders are incompatible with good science.

Another thing to point out is that Travers herself kept publishing during this period, and her papers published while she was suffering from this condition are still cited in important aquatic insect keys.

For example, the Merrit & Cummins aquatic keys (p.1121, for ref).

So...entomologists know the paper needs to be dealt with.

We can't retract it because the author had an illness, but we also have to recognize that it's an important paper even if it's for reasons unintended by the author.

This case has been in the background of entomology for awhile.

In 2011, @mshelomi published reccomendations to either retract or publish a letter of concern in a scientific ethics journal.

researchgate.net/profile/Matan_…

To this day, as far as I know, the paper hasn't been retracted...and it's unlikely to ever be retracted at this point for reasons Shelomi has pointed out.

The damage has already been done, and retracting it may cause a backfire effect.

Even though Traver's observations on her infestation are questionable, I still believe that her paper (as well as Shelomi's) should be required reading for any entomologist who deals with the public.