根据以下材料，回答21-25题
Before publishing this article, the editors asked me to declare any competing interests.This is routine practice with most journals and is intended to address the serious issue of bias in research.The problem is that after competing interests are disclosed in published research, almost nothing is done with them.
Although journals have strengthened their requirements, disclosures are still far from complete.Around half of the studies that involve investigators who hold relevant competing interests fail to declare them.The reasons are rarely the result of a deliberate attempt to mislead readers.Instead, the common causes are inconsistent requirements across journals and negligence.
Some investigators and editors may think that disclosure is a bureaucratic requirement without much practical value.In the current system, it is hard to disagree.There is no reliable guidance on what readers should do when they encounter a competing interest, and no way to know for sure whether competing interests have compromised the integrity of the research findings.Ignoring research that might be biased is clearly wasteful, but allowing it to influence decision-making without knowing whether the results can be trusted might be worse.
Competing interests can cause significant harm by diverting a research consensus away from the truth—from which it can take years to recover.And the complex relationship between the pursuit of knowledge and the pursuit of profit can make such conflicts more likely.
When studies that have competing interests are compared with studies without them, we find consistent differences in how those studies are designed and reported.Biases are hidden in subtle differences in study design, selective reporting of outcomes, and conclusions that don't match the results.It is difficult even for experts using well-developed tools to identify biases, so how can we expect readers to succeed?
We need to move beyond occasionally publishing lists of competing interests alongside articles.We need precise, structured and comprehensive reporting of such interests so that we can treat them like any other confounder.
To achieve this, the research community should establish an online database of interests declared by researchers so that we can more precisely determine the association between competing interests and the potential for bias.It should be publicly accessible, available in formats that can be used by humans and machines alike,designed to allow for updates and corrections, and provide a way to uniquely identify researchers.Because of their distinctive openness and independence,organizations such as the US National Library of Medicine and the ORCID researcher registry are well placed to act as central locations supporting compliance and standardization.In turn, publishers,funders and institutions can introduce policies that encourage or mandate the use of a registry.
Some editors regard the competing interest disclosure system valueless because

A it might make readers ignore the whole research results.

B it gives readers little means to recognize bias in a research.

C it offers advantages that can be taken by investigators.

D it provides no guidance as how decision could be affected.