8. Conclusion

We do not consider that it is necessary within the framework of this informative resource to offer the ways of decision of the studied methodical problem. The collective discussion of this material is needed for this purpose, when a scientific association will want and will be ready to do it. Therefore we will give a mind on formalization essence of conflict in clinical science.

This copy of Cabinet of curiosities affects deals with the private problem of Method in science and general issue of science Methodology.
A private problem keeps indoors for scopes a comparative new diagnostic method which, as follows from the results of testing, is yet distant from perfection.

Until the method of HRV was studied in a few scientific centers of ExUSSR, the quality problems of HRV-method remained as problems of comparatively narrow circle of researchers. In a present situation, when every second clinical dissertation utillizes the method of HRV, a scientific association is under an obligation to provide the proper control of methodical quality.

Our task consisted of formalization of those deformities which are inherent the present state of scientific exploitation of this diagnostic method. The essence of these deformities consists of that different HRV-programs of calculation of spectral descriptions, which are widely utillized in science, give the uncomparable (in times and dozens of times!) results of calculations of the same basic data.Это не позволяют сопоставлять материал разных исследований. So, it is not allowed to compare materials of different researches. Such situation - is a way to discredit the new not deeply studied diagnostic method.

The second aspect of this research straight behaves of methodology in clinical science. While beginning this project we came from motivation to understand the level of own incompetence. For five years of existence of this project we passed a hard teaching way and improved our own software. But now there is the second problem: how to satisfy the scientific association of actuality of theme?. While communicating with the producers of devices and scientists on this topic we constantly run into aspiration to "leave everything as is".
This situation is clear in relation to producers for which an income is main motivation. But how to be with researchers ethics code of which, requires to provide a methodical cleanness?.
When I once offered to one local professor (Lugansk town) to conduct testing of HRV-equipment (firm Solvaig), he straight declared me, that these researches will put scientific researches of his graduate students under a threat, and thats why he will not allow me to do it.
In other situation, when the authors of this project appealed to one Ukrainian professor, organizer of next HRV-conference with preliminary materials with results of our research, we got a refuse to accept these materials for a discussion at the conference.
These two examples demonstrate dispositions sew of clinical science and give a disbelief of the indicated officials from science, that someone can provide the his free streams of information without participation of these officials.
These people were simply lost in time.
As veritable bureaucrats, they want the monopoly on information and want to the absolute title control of it.
In first case a problem was solved by a direct contact with the author of software, which, as a researcher, was interested in a proper methodical instrument.
In second case - an unlucky professor involuntarily became an initiator of proper sew magazine publication and this material in the Internet. Also yet coming him to explain to the quorum of specialists, why he blocked acceptance of this material for consideration at conference.
These examples are another deformity, when the present stereotype of scientific clinical activity, when scientists do not carry, and does not want to carry responsibility for quality of used methods of diagnostics. These stereotypes arose up on a background of actual absence of terms for a scientific competition and therefore substituted for veritable scientific priorities of career of "official from science"