Thanks for the replies. Ive calmed down a bit now, so thinking a bit more rationaly.

I just don't understand why they spend their time tearing my work to pieces saying its rubbish,  then contradicting them selves   only to say yeah  we want to publish your data.  Which the same data they said i should repeat now is ok to publish for some reason. 

I guess i just don't want to have anything more to do with them :(  and the paper would probably involve more work on my behalf

Sorry i had a quick look to see if there was a similar thread but couldn't find one.

I am a new PhD student currently working in the south. The bit of research i am currently involved with, my supervisor and a post doc in the lab intend to publish of which i have been told my name will be included on this paper that they are currently writing.

I know publications look good on the Cv, however i dont feel like my contribution to the research is valid and that i am merely being used as a tool to do their work as they arent in the lab much.

To added to that i have overheard, and heard from other sources that my supervisor and the post doc constantly belittle and downput the work that i have been doing so they can get their crappy publication despite them doing no work at all despite the original proof of concept.

I am sorry for the rant so here is the question.

Have any of you ever rejected a spot on the authors list?

Is there any way of letting them know that i don't want to be included on their publication without snapping and telling i hate them all?


Thanks in advanced

New blood