The concept of sound science has been claimed in recent decades both by those for whom the integrity of science is an essential concern and by those who seek to undermine scientific knowledge through the promise of an integral science.

In the summer of 2018, the topic of Predatory Publishing was brought to the center of public attention by journalists worldwide. This also made it clear that it is more than just an internal scientific problem. Predatory Publishing undermines current best practice in the quality assurance of scientific publications and thus undermines confidence in science. This opens up the possibility of using seemingly scientific publications to present questionable theses, such as the denial of climate change, as sound science. This raises the question of how scientific knowledge can assert itself in a world of fake news, fake sound science, in which "scientific knowledge" is propagated by thought and opinion leaders and scientists then find themselves in a reactive and sometimes defensive position. How is it possible today to recognize Sound Science in a variety of opinions?