Research integrity

Julius Caesar & Daria – Brazilian Tango in Stanford

The published research by Daria Mochly-Rosen and her mentee Julio CB Ferreira supports the theory that maybe Stanford is a bad place for science.

Our protagonists are:

Julio Cesar Batista Ferreira is Professor of Systems Biology at the University of Sao Paolo in Brazil, and his former mentor at Stanford University in USA, Daria Mochly-Rosen. She is associate director of Stanford’s Cardiovascular Institute and endowed Professor of Translational Medicine at the Department of Chemical Systems Biology, while Ferreira is Visiting Associate Professor there.

Mochly-Rosen is originally from Israel, she moved to Stanford in 1997 and rose through the ranks. She used to act as Senior Associate Dean for Research of the Stanford University School of Medicine (2006-2013), and she is also the Founding President of Stanford’s SPARK Global:

“SPARK is a unique partnership between university and industry founded by Professor Daria Mochly-Rosen in 2006 at Stanford University in USA. The purpose is to provide the education and mentorship necessary to advance research discoveries from the bench to the bedside. SPARK provides access to specialized knowledge and technical expertise regarding drug and diagnostic development and sources of funding to support translational efforts.”

Mochly-Rosen gives a TED Talk

Ferreira was Mochly-Rosen’s graduate student 2007-2009 and stayed on as postdoc until 2012, when he returned to his University of Sao Paolo to become associate professor, and later on member of Brazilian Academy of Sciences. Now you will see which groundbreaking research discoveries these two scientists tried to translate into clinician medicine. Ferreira has almost 20 papers on PubPeer, many with Mochly-Rosen. Like this, where they sought to help alcoholics suffering from heart disorders:

Cintia Bagne Ueta , Juliane Cruz Campos , Rudá Prestes E Albuquerque , Vanessa Morais Lima , Marie-Hélène Disatnik , Angélica Bianchini Sanchez , Che-Hong Chen , Marisa Helena Gennari De Medeiros , Wenjin Yang , Daria Mochly-Rosen , Julio Cesar Batista Ferreira Cardioprotection induced by a brief exposure to acetaldehyde: role of aldehyde dehydrogenase 2 Cardiovascular Research (2018) doi: 10.1093/cvr/cvy070

A duplicated dataset, maybe a mistake? Yet I recognise among the authors Marie-Hélène Disatnik, who, before joining Mochly-Rosen’s lab as postdoc, previously graduated with fake science in Thomas Rando‘s lab, also in Stanford. Read here:

Toppling Giants in Stanford

Everyone is talking about Stanford’s President Marc Tessier-Lavigne now. OK, let’s talk about him, and how Stanford deals with research fraud. And then let’s talk about Thomas Rando.

More of the failed heart research, again with Disatnik, and what were they thinking publishing in a journal where authors must upload raw data:

Julio C. B. Ferreira , Juliane C. Campos , Nir Qvit , Xin Qi , Luiz H. M. Bozi , Luiz R. G. Bechara , Vanessa M. Lima , Bruno B. Queliconi , Marie-Helene Disatnik , Paulo M. M. Dourado , Alicia J. Kowaltowski , Daria Mochly-Rosen A selective inhibitor of mitofusin 1-βIIPKC association improves heart failure outcome in rats Nature Communications (2019) doi: 10.1038/s41467-018-08276-6 

Dalechampia elongata: “When comparing figures in this article with the “corresponding” raw data in the supplementary (western blots) I had some observations:
1. Anti-Drp1 and Anti-BIPKC appear highly similar (with different exposure)
2. The blots of Tom70 seem to come from different membrane of unrelated samples, since the order of sample differ between each blots even in the same set of experiment.
3. Finally, the raw data of some bands are missing (Figure 1h: αPKC; Figure 1i: βIIPKC, TOM20, ALDH2; Figure 2d: βIIPKC, MFN1, IDH2).”

This paper was celebrated with a press release by the Brazilian funding agency FAPESP where we were informed that Ferreira and Mochy-Rosen already patented this new drug for heart failure and seek industrial collaborators. Why, yes, in Nature Communications Mochly-Rosen and her colleagues dishonestly claimed: “The authors declare no competing interests.

Mochly-Rosen is also the founder of the multi-million dollar heavy biotech startup Mitoconix (which was registered in Israel), and we also learn that she “was the founder and CSO of Kai Pharmaceuticals, a peptide therapeutic company that was acquired by Amgen in 2011 for $315 million.” The lead product of this company, Etelcalcetide (KAI-4169), later received approvals from FDA and EMA for treatment of kidney disease. The patent for KAI-4169 is however assigned to other people though, not Mochly-Rosen. She also co-founded another company, Aldea Pharmaceuticals, which strived to treat “acute and chronic aldehyde metabolism disorders“, which since 2011 raised many millions in investment ($24 million in 2014 alone), and advanced to “permanently closed” in the same year.

Screenshot Aldea website

In August 2014, shortly before Aldea’s collapse, Stanford celebrated Mochly-Rosen’s paper Zambelli et al 2014 and her miracle painkiller Alda-1 (aldehyde dehydrogenase activator 1):

““Finding a new pain medication is important because we need a safer drug; there are 17,000 deaths from prescription opiate overdoses a year alone,” said Daria Mochly-Rosen, professor of chemical and systems biology. […] “We made what may appear as a crazy leap,” Mochly-Rosen said.”

As Bagne-Ueta et al 2018 mentions, Mochly-Rosen’s Alda-1 patent was sold to the Taiwanese company Foresee Pharmaceuticals.

Ferreira also found cures for many diseases. How about this from his lab, a creative therapy for muscle loss:

Juliane C. Campos , Leslie M. Baehr , Nikolas D. Ferreira , Luiz H. M. Bozi , Allen M. Andres , Márcio A. C. Ribeiro , Roberta A. Gottlieb , Sue C. Bodine, Julio C. B. Ferreira β 2 ‐adrenoceptor activation improves skeletal muscle autophagy in neurogenic myopathy The FASEB Journal (2020) doi: 10.1096/fj.201902305r

As it happens, also the PhD thesis of Ferreira’s doctorate student Juliane Cruz Campos contains duplications. She is a visiting postdoc in Harvard now, sponsored by a fellowship from the Sao Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP). I see a great future for her, she does have the artistic talent to follow into her mentor’s footsteps:

Juliane C. Campos , Leslie M. Baehr , Kátia M. S. Gomes , Luiz R. G. Bechara , Vanessa A. Voltarelli , Luiz H. M. Bozi , Márcio A. C. Ribeiro , Nikolas D. Ferreira , José B. N. Moreira , Patricia C. Brum , Sue C. Bodine , Julio C. B. Ferreira Exercise prevents impaired autophagy and proteostasis in a model of neurogenic myopathy Scientific Reports (2018) doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-30365-1 

Which brings us to another problematic collaboration, with Ferreira’s fellow professor at University of Sao Paolo, Patricia Brum. She has currently 14 very problematic papers on PubPeer. Often as last author, like here:

Julio C B Ferreira , Aline V Bacurau , Carlos R Bueno , Telma C Cunha , Leonardo Y Tanaka , Maira A Jardim , Paulo R Ramires , Patricia C Brum Aerobic exercise training improves Ca2+ handling and redox status of skeletal muscle in mice Experimental Biology and Medicine (2010) doi: 10.1258/ebm.2009.009165

Here more collaborations between Brum, Ferreira and Mochly-Rosen, and of course young shooting star Dr Campos is on board:

Julio C.B. Ferreira , Jose B.N. Moreira , Juliane C. Campos , Marcelo G. Pereira , Katt C. Mattos , Marcele A. Coelho , Patricia C. Brum Angiotensin receptor blockade improves the net balance of cardiac Ca2+ handling-related proteins in sympathetic hyperactivity-induced heart failure Life Sciences (2011) doi: 10.1016/j.lfs.2011.01.009

I am not sure how heart and skeletal muscle deficiency can be cured with fake western blots, but then again, they are the experts, right? Also here:

Juliane C. Campos , Bruno B. Queliconi , Luiz H. M. Bozi , Luiz R. G. Bechara , Paulo M. M. Dourado , Allen M. Andres , Paulo R. Jannig , Kátia M. S. Gomes , Vanessa O. Zambelli, Cibele Rocha-Resende , Silvia Guatimosim , Patricia C. Brum , Daria Mochly-Rosen, Roberta A. Gottlieb, Alicia J. Kowaltowski , Julio C. B. Ferreira Exercise reestablishes autophagic flux and mitochondrial quality control in heart failure Autophagy (2017) doi: 10.1080/15548627.2017.1325062

The Brum-Ferreira-Mochly collaboration goes back at least a decade:

Julio C. B. Ferreira , Berta Napchan Boer , Max Grinberg , Patricia Chakur Brum, Daria Mochly-Rosen Protein quality control disruption by PKCβII in heart failure; rescue by the selective PKCβII inhibitor, βIIV5-3 PLoS ONE (2012) doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0033175 

Ferreira announced on PubPeer, for all of the above threads, to “submit a correction to the journal, if needed.” He also wrote to me a similar message in an email from 29 September 2023:

Dear Leonid,
We are carefully going through pubpeer comments and examining the original data. We will submit a correction to the journal, if needed, and update it in pubpeer.
Julio

Mochly-Rosen never replied to my emails. Well, here is how they correct their papers, again on the topic of alcoholism:

Che-Hong Chen , Julio C.B. Ferreira, Amit U. Joshi , Matthew C. Stevens , Sin-Jin Li , Jade H.-M. Hsu , Rory Maclean , Nikolas D. Ferreira , Pilar R. Cervantes , Diana D. Martinez , Fernando L. Barrientos , Gibran H.R. Quintanares , Daria Mochly-Rosen Novel and prevalent non-East Asian ALDH2 variants; Implications for global susceptibility to aldehydes’ toxicity EBioMedicine (2020)
doi: 10.1016/j.ebiom.2020.102753  

Aneurus inconstans: “Figure 3B, much more similar than expected (red boxes).”

In October 2023, Ferreira announced:

The histogram under the 3B blots has been replotted after reviewing the data and is in agreement with the original histogram. The corrected Fig. 3B and original blots are provided below. We already contacted the editor of the journal.”

This was his new, corrected figure:

Aneurus inconstans: “This is ridiculous. The intended corrected Figure 3B (left) is now changed for all the blots except one (blue boxes, both dashed and full). Astonishingly, in original Figure 3B (right) the actin blot for R338W is now the actin blot for E504K (full blue boxes).

In fact, it seems many people in Mochly-Rosen lab struggle with basic ethics and honesty. This one is a bit older:

Gouri Yogalingam , Sunhee Hwang , Julio C. B. Ferreira , Daria Mochly-Rosen Glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH) phosphorylation by protein kinase Cδ (PKCδ) inhibits mitochondria elimination by lysosomal-like structures following ischemia and reoxygenation-induced injury Journal of Biological Chemistry (2013) doi: 10.1074/jbc.m113.466870 

Fig 1
“a more similar than expected panel was used in Figures 1A and 3G to represent different conditions (H1 Cells and Isolated rat heart cells).”
Figure 5A and 5C
Fig 1E

The first author Gouri Yogalingam, now Senior Scientist at the Californian biotech Bio Marin Pharmaceutical, explained on PubPeer:

This paper was completed after I left the lab. I don’t recall stitching together different lanes of gels to make a figure like this if that’s what the claim is. It seems too difficult to do. Pub Peer is claiming that the lanes have been duplicated but while I see the similarities I also see differences. There is a gap between one band and another but I recall that the X-ray film would have grainy marks on them sometimes and sometimes if gels didn’t transfer well or were dirty you could get lines between the bands. I’m not sure what the claim is here and don’t recall details from a decade ago but I stand by the data shown here and the conclusions made.”

But of course, Gouri. It’s the amazing reproducibility of your stellar heart research, not gel band duplications. Let’s look at another paper.

Nir Qvit , Amit U. Joshi , Anna D. Cunningham , Julio C. B. Ferreira , Daria Mochly-Rosen Glyceraldehyde-3-Phosphate Dehydrogenase (GAPDH) Protein-Protein Interaction Inhibitor Reveals a Non-catalytic Role for GAPDH Oligomerization in Cell Death Journal of Biological Chemistry (2016) doi: 10.1074/jbc.m115.711630

Duplicated datasets?

First and co-corresponding author Nir Qvit, now Assistant Professor at Bar Ilan University in Israel, accused the PubPeer commentor of slander and forgery:

He/She copied and pasted panel Fig. 6H from our JBC paper (see attached below as published originally) on top of our original panel Fig. 6J.”

True, the online version of the paper shows no duplication. But the one on Sci-Hub does, yet Qvit insisted that copy was somehow forged by third parties. Of course, there is an alternative explanation. Sci-Hub stores the “In Press” version of Qvit’s paper (i.e., authors’ original accepted manuscript), which must have received a stealth correction during the copy-editing stage. Journals feel they don’t have to issue Corrigenda when “mistakes” are fixed by the publisher during the typesetting, before the official publication. Also, Ferreira uploaded the same In Press copy on ResearchGate, but Qvit insisted:

We can not recall that the authors have made any changes or contacted JBC in 2021.”

It gets better! In the same PubPeer thread, a gel band duplication was alleged between this and an earlier paper by same authors, which Qvit disproved by uploading extended gels. The originally highlighted bands were indeed not identical. But! Other duplications were found thanks to what Qvit supplied:

Qvit refused to discuss this. But sure, he never makes mistakes:

Nir Qvit , Amanda J. Lin , Aly Elezaby , Nicolai P. Ostberg , Juliane C. Campos , Julio C. B. Ferreira , Daria Mochly-Rosen A Selective Inhibitor of Cardiac Troponin I Phosphorylation by Delta Protein Kinase C (δPKC) as a Treatment for Ischemia-Reperfusion Injury Pharmaceuticals (2022) doi: 10.3390/ph15030271

“Figure 4B: More similar than expected with panels found at previous publications (10.1074/jbc.M115.711630 and 10.1002/anie.201605429). In the previous papers, authors used Wistar male rats, four to six weeks old. In Qvit et al, 2022 study, authors used ”Between 10- and 12-week-old wild-type male Sprague Dawley rats””

Qvit explained that the image reuse was intentional and correct, extended from the research in 2016, and he never claimed “the controls in the three studies were the same” and anyway, “in Israel we do not use the Wistar rats, so I mistakenly wrote Spargue Dawley rats.”

Yet Qvit and Mochly-Rosen already had to correct their 2016 paper for a similar problem:

Nir Qvit, Opher S. Kornfeld , Daria Mochly-Rosen Engineered Substrate-Specific Delta PKC Antagonists to Enhance Cardiac Therapeutics Angewandte Chemie International Edition (2016) doi: 10.1002/anie.201605429

Erratum from February 2017: “‘In the middle panel of Figure 1 c of this Communication, a wrong image for the ψDrp1-treated heart was included. The correct image is shown below. This change does not alter the overall data or the conclusion of the study.'”

Actually, maybe it is Mochly-Rosen who trained Ferreira, Qvit and others in bad science, who then trained the next generation like Campos? Her own PubPeer record includes papers without Ferreira.

In 2019, Mochly-Rosen presented a cure for Alzheimer’s disease, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, Parkinson’s disease, dementia and Huntington’s disease, a drug named P110 which she says prevents mitochondrial fragmentation. The paper is announced to be corrected for a second time:

Amit U. Joshi , Paras S. Minhas , Shane A. Liddelow , Bereketeab Haileselassie , Katrin I. Andreasson , Gerald W. Dorn , Daria Mochly-Rosen Fragmented mitochondria released from microglia trigger A1 astrocytic response and propagate inflammatory neurodegeneration Nature Neuroscience (2019) doi: 10.1038/s41593-019-0486-0 

“in panel f of the same Fig 2, the IL-1beta values look like the TNF-alpha values multiplied by 2 (except for the control group values, which look the same)”

In December 2020, a Correction was issued by the authors:

“In the version of this article initially published, two graphs were inadvertently duplicated in Fig. 2: the left graph in Fig. 2f and the right graph in Fig. 2k. These graphs have been replotted after reviewing the data; results and conclusions were not affected.”

Then, in August 2023, Paul S Brookes found this:

The first author Amit Joshi, c-holder of the P110 patent and now Senior Director at the Californian biotech startup Autobahn Labs, still saw no reason to worry:

A series of unintentional actions led to the submission of ‘mock’ placeholder images, which were meant to be replaced with the correct images. We have notified the Editor of the journal about these errors and provided them with all the relevant raw data. It is crucial to emphasize that these mistakes in figure preparation in the indicated image panels do not in any way reflect the actual outcomes of the study.”

Original images: @EEFEUSPoficial‧/YouTube, Mochly-Rosen Lab/Stanford

Elsewhere we learn that study’s patented drug P110 has been “licensed to Mitoconix Bioscience, a company that DM-R founded, that develops new treatment for Huntington’s disease“. In 2017, Mochly-Rosen’s Mitoconix raised $20 million with her Huntington Disease drug, which is the same P110:

“Mitoconix Bio’s lead product MTC-1203, is a first-in-class selective inhibitor of excessive mitochondrial division for treating Huntington’s disease and other neurodegenerative disorders. MTC-1203 has demonstrated efficacy in mouse models of Huntington’s and Parkinson’s diseases.”

For some reason, Mitoconix went bust soon after in June 2019 (as Mochly-Rosen explained on PubPeer, before the paper was published). Kind of reminiscent of her other startup Aldea’s way – raise many millions from investors and close shop right after. Unlike Aldea’s, Mitoconix website has been deleted, but there are online archives and even a PowerPoint presentation for those nostalgic:

From Mitoconix 2017

Maybe, just maybe, Mitoconix and Aldea with their miracle drugs failed, because, I am speculating, taking wild guesses and stabbing in the dark here, because Mochly-Rosen’s preclinical science was dodgy, held together only by photoshopped blots and recycled microscopy images?

Mochly-Rosen may have many talents, but reliable science is apparently not one of them. Look at this study of hers with a certain James Fagin, Professor at Memorial Sloan Kettering, whose own PubPeer record is very worrisome:

Jeffrey A. Knauf , Laura S. Ward , Yuri E. Nikiforov , Marina Nikiforova , Efisio Puxeddu , Mario Medvedovic , Tamar Liron , Daria Mochly-Rosen , James A. Fagin Isozyme-specific abnormalities of PKC in thyroid cancer: evidence for post-transcriptional changes in PKC epsilon The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism (2002) doi: 10.1210/jcem.87.5.8441 

The PKCalpha blots for patients 2 and 6 look very similar. There is also an overlap between patient 1 and patient 6.”

Just so you know Fagin is capable of, again with his mentee Jeffrey Knauf:

Roberta Malaguarnera, Kuen-Yuan Chen , Tae-Yong Kim , Jose M. Dominguez , Francesca Voza , Bin Ouyang , Sushil K. Vundavalli , Jeffrey A. Knauf, James A. Fagin Switch in signaling control of mTORC1 activity after oncoprotein expression in thyroid cancer cell lines The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism (2014) doi: 10.1210/jc.2013-3976 

There are many more cloned gel bands in that paper, but Knauf declared on PubPeer in May 2019 the raw data to be unavailable, all conclusions unaffected, any anyway, “quantification of band intensity (see raw values below) done at the time shows that they are not identical“. Knauf’s name is on almost all of Fagin’s fake papers on PubPeer, and he still works in Fagin’s lab as “Associate Attending Biologist”.

Anyway, those papers are Fagin’s problem. But Mochly-Rosen and Ferreira have their own problematic papers to deal with. I suggest sending them the way Mitoconix went.

This was not an honest mistake by Ferreira and Campos:

Idula Ramesh , Juliane C. Campos , Pamela Lee , Yang Song , Genaro Hernandez , Jon Sin , Kyle C. Tucker , Hannaneh Saadaeijahromi , Michael Gurney, Julio C. B. Ferreira, Allen M. Andres Mitophagy protects against statin-mediated skeletal muscle toxicity The FASEB Journal (2019) doi: 10.1096/fj.201900807rr 

Not likely a mere oversight by Ferreira and Brum:

M. G. Pereira , J. C. B. Ferreira , C. R. Bueno , K. C. Mattos , K. T. Rosa , M. C. Irigoyen , E. M. Oliveira , J. E. Krieger, Patricia Chakur Brum Exercise training reduces cardiac angiotensin II levels and prevents cardiac dysfunction in a genetic model of sympathetic hyperactivity-induced heart failure in mice European Journal of Applied Physiology (2009) doi: 10.1007/s00421-008-0967-4 

The crazy thing is that the Brazilian researcher Ferreira learned such rotten approach to science in Stanford. But then again, not only the (recently resigned) Stanford President Marc Tessier Lavigne but even Nobel Prize laureates there struggle with research ethics. Look at Thomas Südhof.

Maybe Stanford is a bad place for science.


One-Time
Monthly

I thank all my donors for supporting my journalism. You can be one of them!
Make a one-time donation:

I thank all my donors for supporting my journalism. You can be one of them!
Make a monthly donation:

Choose an amount

€5.00
€10.00
€20.00
€5.00
€10.00
€20.00

Or enter a custom amount


Your contribution is appreciated.

Your contribution is appreciated.

DonateDonate monthly

24 comments on “Julius Caesar & Daria – Brazilian Tango in Stanford

  1. E Helena Kross

    I cannot comment on issues regarding blots, though I read about them regularly in this blog. I am an a retired behavioral/physiological ecologist whose bad experiences at UC Irvine are postponed. But today I had to (regrettably) explain to a friend why Zelenskyy is not a Nazi and thought immediately of Leonid. We need to support Leonid’s efforts in exposing the truth in science and politics.

    Like

    • These days, “Nazi” is someone you hate. Actual Nazis and fascists will.sue you for calling them that. Instead, they call the targets of their hatred “Nazis”. Ukrainians, Jews, Greens, LGBT, etc.
      It brought the concept of fascism and Nazism to absurdity, with the end result that the only ones who are never called fascists and Nazis are russia and its Trumpster fans.

      Like

  2. The chart showing survival in the image behind the title is apt.
    Science selects for those who try it on, cheat.
    Those who do not cheat have reduced chances of survival.

    There is a whole culture which suppresses criticism of cheating,
    ranging from it offending misplaced ideas of politeness,
    through misunderstanding what Jesus said about being the first to throw a stone,
    to getting the lawyers out. And that is just in polite circles.
    All helped along by laziness on the part of journal editors and reviewers,
    although considering reviewers aren’t paid (part of the journal business model to make more money) can you blame the reviewers?

    The corporate manifestations of science, those are the universities and
    research institutes, must by now know about whole-scale cheating.
    Even if the university leadership doesn’t read the scientific journals it comes up in the main newspapers.
    It is as if universities have to be pushed into a corner to do anything about cheating.
    Universities stress quantity of publications, what do they expect?

    Cheating is so common that people may be bored with reports about it.
    Cheating is the way of the world in science too.
    Funny that it is taking such a long time for that penny to drop with scientists,
    or perhaps there are few left.

    Liked by 1 person

    • alfricabos

      It reminds me of a discussion I had once, a long time ago, with a researcher from a far away country (known for its great wall). He openly insisted that it didn’t matter if science results were right or wrong, since it was “all a game”.

      Like

  3. I once wrote to the editor-in-chief of the Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism about problematic data. It was a man at that time, perhaps somebody different than at present.
    His reply: “who cares?”.

    Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism is one of the most shoddy journals there is.
    That will be an advert for it as more fraudsters will line up to publish in it.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. “James Fagin, Professor at Memorial Sloan Kettering, whose own PubPeer record is very worrisome”

    No, that isn’t worrisome, that’s what got him the professorship. It’s splendid!

    https://www.pubpeer.com/search?q=james+fagin

    Liked by 1 person

  5. Julio’s department has a complaint channel (ouvidoria.icb@icb.usp.br), but I doubt they would act now that he was just promoted to become a Full Professor (https://buscatextual.cnpq.br/buscatextual/visualizacv.do?id=K4779756D2)

    Like

  6. Great work once again, although I’m missing the usual “Israeli Scientists” trade mark label 😂

    Like

  7. contro-vento

    I know Julio Cesar Batista Ferreira personally, and his laboratory in São Paulo. Julio is a typical rising star of research in South America, beholden to his research “Godfathers” in the United States. He is emblematic of the charismatic ambitious young professor who will do whatever it takes–the hustling and politicking–and making magic happen on paper. A bright, energetic mind seizing upon opportunity where it presents itself. I was surprised to read this piece, but pleased. Pull back the curtain, there are thousands like him. The world of academic research has utterly lost its nexus with reality. It exists as a platform for those who can create the most plausible story to leverage for wealth, prestige and power. And, as Norton above pointed out, there will be no consequences at all from any of this. Imagine, if a Nobel Prize winner has retractions littering his doorstep… Julio is just getting started, and will have a long a fruitful career in impunity. Fraud aside, he is too valuable to the system he champions. Nevertheless, it will be nice to link the Brazilian news outlets to this article. The Brazilian people are an honest and hardworking lot and they deserve to know when one of their priviledged ones has broken their trust.

    Liked by 1 person

  8. Harry Garrick

    okay, talking about the blots, you had the responsibility to see if these “photoshopped” images are reflected in the results presented (which for me is the main part of the paper). I say this because I read the post on the 15th and was surprised and scared when see the manipulations mentioned, but I reserved my doubts, and went to check the works mentioned (I suggest it to everyone), especially the characters in the title of the post, Julios Caesar and Daria. But what I found was, in addition to there not being some of the manipulations mentioned (probably as said in the post they have already been retracted) the ”manipulated” images are not reflected in the results in any of the cases mentioned, regarding these two accused (I didn’t have time to check the others mentioned). I therefore believe that this case, This is a problem of choices for representative images (avoid having ugly blots in your papers so that it is more aesthetically publishable) and not a purely ethical issue as accused.

    Like

    • Pardon what?
      Western blots are no “representative images”, Harry. Those are THE DATA.

      Like

      • Harry Garrick

        Yes I understand. What I’m trying to say is that it’s clear that it wasn’t the results of the aforementioned blots that were plotted and discussed in the results, they were probably the real ones. This is clearly not the right thing to do, far from it, but it is also not a creation of fictitious data and information, a false science, as accused. There are solid foundations and robust arguments that the blot images support, but again I do not think it is correct to make such changes. And I make it clear that I’m only talking about the publications of the two involved in the title, I couldn’t check the other posters so I can’t comment on them.

        Like

      • No it’s not clear. The published fake blots are the wrong ones, those described in the text are data not shown correct ones? Did I get it right?

        Like

      • Harry Garrick

        Sorry if I didn’t make myself clear, I’ll give you an example, I recently attended a university in Mexico for a while. And in developing countries like Mexico and Brazil there is not as much support and investment in science as in America and Europe, resources are quite limited. Therefore, people made blots and built discussions and results about them, however these blots, whether due to the quality of the reader or other economic factors, were not “aesthetically publishable”, so to publish they used previously acquired images that represented the same behavior as real blots but that they were more aesthetic, in order to have a greater chance of publication in international magazines, which is already quite difficult in these underdeveloped countries.

        Like

    • The unavailability of raw data in the referenced papers prevents a full assessment of all potential issues.

      However, the integrity of the remaining data is compromised when authors recycle Western Blot data across papers to represent different experimental conditions, duplicate lanes in Western Blots, and magnify sections of microscopy images to depict distinct experimental conditions.

      Such practices inevitably cast a shadow of doubt on the credibility of the research findings. And even if the remaining data is still valid, this is a form of cheating and should not be acceptable.

      Like

  9. Dr. Campos thesis was awarded as one of the best thesis in USP in 2018

    https://agencia.fapesp.br/estudos-apoiados-pela-fapesp-ganham-premio-tese-destaque-usp/28770

    Liked by 1 person

  10. Congrats to Dr. Patricia Brum who was recently elected to become a full member of the Brazilian Academy of Sciences!!

    https://www.abc.org.br/2023/12/04/novos-membros-da-abc-eleitos-em-2023/

    Like

  11. UPDATE to the dreadful paper Chen et al. 2020 EBioMedicine:

    https://pubpeer.com/publications/072CB6D38853F4F5342D7A0138B44D#4

    Like

Leave a comment