Abstract: While analyzing data for the next grant proposal or attempting to get a paper in a high impact journal, it is easy to be disappointed by data that do not look as expected and decide to bury the results. Yet publication of carefully obtained and analyzed “negative” data can be of incredible value to science and can be more easily accepted in peer-reviewed journal than expected. To make the information available to peers is an ethical decision that can prevent unnecessary use of animals and reagents, avoid the waste of time and effort of fellow researchers that were planning to follow a similar direction, maybe stop a clinical trial and, overall, help move forward the scientific enterprise. From a less altruistic point of view, publication of negative results can strengthen the reputation of a scientist, and provide rationale for innovative ideas. In this presentation we will discuss the difference between “negative” and “useless” data, the importance of unbiased experimental design, strategies to deal with “bad” data and specific examples of the positive impact of “negative” publications.