Scientific progress depends on efficient mechanisms to select, quality control and efficiently share rigorous and reproducible research. The editorial and peer review process at scientific journals continues to play an important role in quality assurance by selection for the reliability, reproducibility and integrity of the experimental data, as well as the interest of the claims made. However, this process often takes months or even years due to extensive revision cycle and serial submission to different journals. Furthermore, many valuable research findings, including confirmatory, descriptive, negative or refuting data, are never published in journals and therefore not shared. In a rapidly developing research field such as the biosciences, the delay and selectivity are major impediments to the overall efficacy of research progress. Sharing research findings through preprint platforms such as bioRxiv offers a mechanism that is complementary and synergistic with journal publishing. While preprint posting has been fully established in the physical sciences for a quarter of a century, it remains terra nova for the biosciences, the medical sciences and chemical sciences. I will discuss cultural and institutional obstacles in implementing for this delayed adoption, impediments to a broad adoption and how these can be overcome. Open Science is about efficient access to all meaningful research outputs; it encompasses “big data” just as much as bench science. I will touch on mechanisms of open science communication beyond preprints and mention cultural and institutional obstacles in implementing an Open Science future that renders scientific research more efficient and effective.