Schneider Shorts 24.11.2023 – Breakthroughs driving our mission to end cancer
Schneider Shorts 24.11.2023 - science advances one funeral at a time, journal editors vs Trieste fraud, qualifications you need in Texas, half-hearted retractions and non-retractions, a Bielefeld Conspiracy, and finally, with cures for autism and all brain disorders.
Schneider Shorts of 24 November 2023 – science advances one funeral at a time, journal editors vs Trieste fraud, qualifications you need in Texas, half-hearted retractions and non-retractions, a Bielefeld Conspiracy, and finally, with cures for autism and all brain disorders.
Cullen Taniguchi is dead. The MD Anderson oncologist and University of Texas associate professor professor died on 15 November 2023, aged 47.
Earlier this year he was elected as AAAS fellow, “for impactful research that revealed the role of HIF2 in hypoxia-mediated cellular communication within tumors and normal tissues, leading to translational breakthroughs in regenerative medicine and cancer biology.” One obituary is here, the cause of death was so far not disclosed. Taniguchi definitely did not appear sick or frail just weeks ago.
— MD Anderson Cancer Center (@MDAndersonNews) October 2, 2023
Max Planck’s Rule applies – science advances one funeral at a time. Taniguchi based his career on data manipulation, he misled patients to advance his career. Have a look at his PubPeer record.
Taniguchi learned his skills from some massive science cheaters: the diabetes cheater Carl Ronald Kahn in Harvard, and the cancer cheater Amato Giaccia, back then in Stanford. Taniguchi’s PhD mentor at Harvard was yet another cancer cheater, Lewis Cantley. These mighty alpha males made sure that Taniguchi’s career suffered no setbacks even despite two retractions and evidence of fraud in other papers.
“not everyone in the research community accepts that the problem requires such attention; some believe it is overblown.” -Jeffrey Flier, emeritus dean of Harvard Medical School
A 2006 Nature paper from Stanford is retracted. We all know the first author Janine Erler, but why is nobody talking of its last author, Amato Giaccia? I celebrate here another Oxford star scientist.
Corrected in May 2005 for “an incorrect shRNA sequence“, retracted in November 2016:
“At the request of the corresponding author, the JCI is retracting this article. The authors were recently made aware of duplicated bands in Figures 1B, 3C, and 4C. After an extensive internal review, it was discovered that these duplications were introduced during figure assembly. The authors have stated that experimental data generated in the lab from the same time period support the original conclusions of the study and that other studies have subsequently confirmed and extended the primary conclusions of the manuscript. However, in the interest of maintaining accuracy in the published scientific literature and because the initial figures were not up to the standards of the JCI, the authors wish to retract this article. The authors apologize for these errors.”
Presumably, Harvard investigated Kahn’s lab and found that the scam can continue after a couple of corrections and a minor setback of two retractions:
“This article has been withdrawn by the authors. The authors were recently made aware of duplicated images of PCR reaction products in panels B and D in Fig. 2. These duplications were inadvertently introduced during figure assembly. Review of the original data generated in the lab at that time (2000–2002), as well as subsequent studies, confirmed the conclusions of the manuscript. However, in the interest of maintaining accuracy in the published scientific literature and because the initial figures were not up to the standards of JBC, the authors wish to withdraw this article. The authors apologize for these errors.”
More retractions for a dead man would be simply impolite and callous. If need arises, an Erratum will suffice.
The Erratum from February 2016 did not bother about the fake gels and fixed only Figure 1A:
“Due to an error in assembling the final figures of the manuscript, the middle panel […] was accidentally duplicated and inserted in the top left corner in place of the panel”
Also this was corrected, despite image reuse from above paper:
“Due to an error during preparation of the manuscript, the original Fig. 4A in this manuscript showing examples of PIP3 staining contained two panels (the lox/lox sample at 0 min and the KO at 15 min) from animals that were not a part of this study. A corrected version of Fig. 4A is now shown below containing the correct representative examples of the staining in each genotype at each time point. We have also repeated the quantitative analysis of the staining intensity, derived from the recovered images, and include a new version of Fig. 4B as well. This is not significantly different from the original Fig. 4B and supports the original conclusion that p85 is involved in the regulation of PTEN and PIP3 turnover. We apologize for any confusion that this mistake may have caused.”
Basically, the authors admitted to have faked that figure a second time. Also here, the fake western blot was not addressed. More accidental duplications:
Maybe the deal back in 2016 was: Taniguchi stops polluting the diabetes field with fake science, and all is forgiven? Before his death, he was working on hypoxia in cancer, funded by NIH, NASA and other big grant agencies. Are we supposed to wail, lament and tear out our hair that Taniguchi, because of his untimely death, took the cure for cancer to his grave?
Nobel Prize, right… It was already given for HIF research….
“Even after people have been telling you for, you know, 20 years or more that it’s going to happen, no one expects it.” -Gregg Semenza, Nobel Prize winner 2019
When Taniguchi was elected AAAS fellow in January 2023, MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, Texas, celebrated:
““AAAS Fellows are recognized as the top researchers in their fields, and election signifies tremendous respect from the scientific community. Drs. Lai, Taniguchi and Tsimberidou are entirely deserving of this honor, and we applaud their contributions to cancer care and research,” said Giulio Draetta, M.D., Ph.D., chief scientific officer. “To have 61 MD Anderson faculty elected to this group over our history is a testament to our culture of innovation and breakthroughs driving our mission to end cancer.” “
I personally believe MD Anderson sacks everyone who DOES NOT engage in research fraud.
The MD Anderson Cancer Center, part of the University of Texas and located in Houston, is a giant hub of huge cancer research money, even for US standards. They also do a lot of science there, which only purpose seems to be publishing in big journals in order to generate even more money. If there…
Here it is difficult to say who is to blame, Draetta, Lew Cantley or MD Anderson’s former president Ronald DePinho (who resigned for mismanagement but kept his immense salary of $1 million per year):
Andrea Viale , Piergiorgio Pettazzoni , Costas A. Lyssiotis , Haoqiang Ying , Nora Sánchez , Matteo Marchesini , Alessandro Carugo , Tessa Green , Sahil Seth , Virginia Giuliani , Maria Kost-Alimova , Florian Muller , Simona Colla , Luigi Nezi , Giannicola Genovese , Angela K. Deem , Avnish Kapoor , Wantong Yao , Emanuela Brunetto , Ya’an Kang , Min Yuan, John M. Asara, Y. Alan Wang, Timothy P. Heffernan, Alec C. Kimmelman, Huamin Wang, Jason B. Fleming, Lewis C. Cantley, Ronald A. DePinho, Giulio F. Draetta Oncogene ablation-resistant pancreatic cancer cells depend on mitochondrial functionNature (2014) doi: 10.1038/nature13611
David Sabatini, remember that story? Well, it seems the conclusions were not affected. I take an ill-informed look at the mTOR signalling research field, to understand how photoshopped data gets to be independently verified by other labs.
As Chief Scientific Officer since 2019, Draetta is in charge of all research misconduct investigations at MD Anderson. Which explains why science thugs like Anil Sood and George Calin just rise and rise.
“The graduate school at University of Texas MD Anderson does not care and keep sending students to his lab, Sood is a member of faculty there. RIO at MDACC doesn’t care because witnesses either left the country or are too afraid to speak.”
Meet Patrick Mountapmbeme Kouotou, Head of the Research of the Experimentation and Production Center Higher Institute of Agriculture, Wood, Water and Environment at the University of Ebolowa, Cameroon. His LinkedIn profile informs us:
“My doctoral work was supported by a stipend by the Deutsche Akademische Austauschdienst (DAAD) from 2011-2014, and I received my PhD degree in Physical chemistry from the University of Bielefeld ( July 2014) under the supervision of Prof. Dr. Katharina Kohse-Höinghaus.”
Katharina Kohse-Höinghaus replied to me demanding I introduce myself properly, because my email account is not professional and my website suspicious. The professor also provided her expert assessment to the spectra duplications in her papers with Kouotou, translated:
“I saw the comments on pubpeer.com and checked the original images. In my opinion everything is in order. How do you prove that the data was falsified?”
She also educated me that I must first contact an expert for an opinion before pestering scientists with messages. Now, you might find it weird that a German chemistry professor (CV here), such a nationally and internationally renowned expert, member of Academies in Germany and China, Senator of the biggest German research institutions, President of learned societies, awardee of greatest science awards, that this brightest mind of German science thinks that spectra from separate experiments are supposed to be identical?
Another fun fact: co-author Henning Vieker, who also completed his award-winning PhD with Kohse-Höinghaus in 2014, is a conservative (CDU) politician and since 2022 mayor of his home town of Espelkamp near Bielefeld (just like his father before him!). Disclaimer: I am a member of the Green party, so create your own conspiracy theories.
The corresponding author on both these papers is a former postdoc of Kohse-Höinghaus, Zhen-Yu Tian, now professor at the Chinese Academy of Sciences. After his graduation in Bielefeld, Kouotou followed Tian to Beijing. The two men were very productive:
Right: “There are some anomalies in the EDS spectra including sudden contrast changes and repetitive noise in the baseline.“
Any experts in the audience? I am afraid to pester Prof Kohse-Höinghaus and The Mayor again with false alarms about non-issues. Is everything really in order?
Retraction Watchdogging
The institution referred the matter back to the authors
A retraction for the 80-year-old Argentina-born geneticist Francisco Baralle, director of the International Centre for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology (ICGEB) in Trieste, Italy. The fake science by the Secretary-General of ICGEB Lawrence Banks already featured as a Coda in this article about Trieste researchers:
“together with my colleagues we are actively analyzing the points raised on pubpeer.” – Claudio Schneider “we will evaluate Pubpeer comments” – Giannino Del Sal
Here is the retracted paper, featuring another ICGEB group leader – a younger man named Marco Baralle because this is Italy and you are supposed to give jobs to family:
“Following allegations of image manipulation in Figures 2B, 2D, 4C, 4E and 6B-D in 2022, the journal conducted a brief investigation, referred the matter to the authors’ institution, and published an Expression of Concern.
The authors have since been unable to produce the original data. Because of the lack of data to support the original conclusions and after an investigation substantiated the issues raised about Figures 2B, 4E, and 6B-D, in September 2023, the institutional committee investigating the allegations recommended retracting the article. The Editors of the journal are now retracting the article based on the following findings of the institutional investigation:
Figure 2B: Difference analysis software indicated that lanes 1, 3, and 4, are identical.
Figure 4E: Difference analysis software indicated that lanes 9 and 10 are identical.
Figure 6B-D: Difference analysis software indicated that lanes or areas within panels have been duplicated within all 3 panels.
The institutional investigation concluded the following about the other images:
Figure 2D: difference analysis software indicated that lanes 1, 3 and 5 show a high proportion of similarity which may indicate duplication. Lanes 2, 4 and 6 show a high proportion of similarity and which may indicate duplication.
Figure 4C: The bands in the hnRNP A2/B1 and hnRNPA1 panels are similar but not identical.
Given the extent of the above issues, the Editors have lost confidence in the paper.”
An Italian research institution requests a retraction? Really? Don’t get your spirits up.
First of all, the main culprit is not Baralle Junior, but his Dad, with 14 PubPeer entries. Maybe the next paper in the same journal will be retracted next, it also has many fake figures and an Expression of Concern:
Elisabeth Bik: “…rather peculiar shape of the error bars and tick lines on the bar graphs. Several look like they were hand-drawn after a couple of too many drinks. Pointed out with red arrows. […] I did not mark all drunk error bars. Also note that some bars appear to levitate above the X-axis, which might further indicate a level of inebriation.“
The Editorial Expression of Concern from October 2023 listed various instances of manipulation and stated: “The Editors have contacted the authors and are investigating.”
Also this Baralle paper, again in the same journal, received a similar Expression of Concern in February 2023:
An Editor’s Note from 4 October 2023 was then published:
“The experiments were conducted almost 20 years ago, and the authors no longer have the original data.
The Editors analysed the two figures and noted areas of similarity in Figure 2C, as well as a likely splice line between the last two lanes of Figure 3B. Some images resulting from the analyses are provided below.
.
The Editors referred the matter to the authors institution for investigation, however the institution referred the matter back to the authors. The authors maintain that they no longer have the original data. The Editors therefore do not have sufficient information to definitively refute the issues identified. While these issues may not affect the results or conclusion of the study, in the absence of original data, the Editors advise readers to examine Figures 2C and 3B with care.”
What else can you expect for the ICGEB Secretary-General Banks who already investigated his own papers and found nothing wrong -“the institution referred the matter back to the authors“. But this is how ALL research misconduct investigations are done in Italy, I fear.
Same journal again, and here no Expressions or Notes yet, maybe because the evidence appeared rather recently:
And here it gets interesting. On 11 November 2023, the journal published this Editor’s Note:
“The Editors were alerted in August 2023 about potential issues with Figure 1B: the backgrounds of lanes 2 (5′ dom III (172–227)) and 3 (5′ dom III (145–248)) show a high level of similarity with the backgrounds of lanes 4 (5′ wt) and 5 (5′ S/L).
An Expression of Concern was published in September 2023.
The Editors analysed the figure and noted areas of similarity. One image resulting from that analysis, with the Exclusion filter and Brightness/Contrast adjustments applied, is provided below. Circles of the same colour point to areas of similarity. Orange arrows point to probable splice lines. Green arrows point to areas where a blur tool appears to have been applied.
The Editors subsequently contacted the authors, who could not provide the original data because the experiments were conducted over 20 years ago.
The Editors then referred the matter to the authors’ institution for investigation. Ultimately, the institution and authors acknowledge that some splicing did occur in Figure 1B. However, the institution and the authors noted that:
The ‘masked’ area in the figure is the positive control (lanes 4 and 5).
There is no evidence of splicing in Figure 1C (in vitro transcription and translation of the same mutants). This figure shows that there are no bands above the positive controls, which would correspond to translation products in the mutants above the 25 and 23 kDa compared to controls (lanes 1–3).
The Editors also note that Figures 5B and 5C show essentially the same results as Figures 1B and 1C.
In conclusion, while these issues may not affect the results or conclusion of the study, in the absence of original data, the Editors advise readers to examine Figure 1B with care.”
The self-investigator Baralle, that old pirate rapscallion Banks and their ICGEB crew must have decided that fraud is just part of scientific process. The retraction above was approved by them only because the journal editors insisted, too many figures were found to be forged. But this study by Baralle, in a different journal this time, is perfectly fine, simply because no journal editor is bothered:
A retraction for US-Brazilian killer doctors who poisoned COVID-19 patients in order to prove that the hair loss drug they were selling as a COVID-19 cure works. Thousands of patients were treated by Flavio Cadegiani‘s gang with active support of the Bolsonaro government, the control group was poisoned by a bizarre mixture of all possible drugs this gang also pushed (chloroquine, ivermectin, etc), many patients died. The proxalutamide group was declared to have a lower mortality, the criminally unethical and fraudulent studies were published in various journals, in particular in Cureus and in Frontiers.
Male boldness causes COVID-19 death, go figure. This ridiculous quackery from Brazil is based on fudged clinical trials, sponsored by an obscure Californian hair loss business, and even Torello Lotti is on board!
So far, only the Frontiers paper was eventually retracted (read here), already in summer 2022, the rest remained safe as houses. But now, this proxalutamide paper was retracted:
“A severe case of COVID-19 was observed in an otherwise healthy 28-year-old man who had taken oxandrolone 40 mg/day as an anabolic steroid. The patient had been taking oxandrolone for enhanced bodybuilding 30 days prior to presenting to an outpatient clinic with COVID-19 symptoms. The patient reported that his symptoms have rapidly worsened over the course of 4 days prior to presenting at the clinic. As part of an experimental antiandrogen treatment for hyperandrogenic men suffering from COVID-19, he was administered a single 600 mg dose of the novel antiandrogen proxalutamide.”
Of course the patient was declared cured thanks to proxalutamide which the authors’ Californian company Applied Biology Inc is selling. On 1 November 2023, the study was retracted with this short notice:
“This case report has been retracted. The journal and publisher have retracted this case report following concerns raised with BMJ. This is because the evidence of informed consent that the authors provided was inadequate in the context of an experimental treatment.”
Elsevier’s Journal of Energy Storage deigned to retract two papers from a special edition which consists of nothing but papermilled fraud. 87 were fake papers smuggled into the Special Issue Recent Advances in Battery Thermal Management by the gang of the papermillers Nader Karimi, Mohammad Arjmand, Cong Qi and Masoud Afrand. You can read about the backstory here:
The German Editor-in-Chief Dirk-Uwe Sauer stepped down, action was promised by Elsevier to Alexander Magazinov, and Concerns were Expressed, for 83 out of 87 papermilled forgeries in this special issue.
And now, we are supposed to thank Elsevier on our knees for retracting two of them. Yes, just two.
First, a paper featuring the citation scammer Changhe Li. He pays papermills to cite him, always out of context and sometimes in massive blocks.
“This article has been retracted at the request of the editor.
In investigating concerns brought up regarding the authenticity of the article, the editor reached out to the authors for an explanation.
Furthermore, the editor discovered suspicious changes in authorship between the original submission and the revised version of this paper. In summary, the name of the original corresponding author was removed from the paper during revision. The authors Kamal Sharma, El-Awady ATTIA, Anas Abdelrahman, and Azheen Ghafour Mohammed were all added to the revised paper without explanation and without exceptional approval by the editor, which is contrary to the journal policy on changes to authorship.
The authors failed to provide a satisfactory explanation to the above points.
The editor therefore feels that the findings of the manuscript cannot be relied upon and that the article needs to be retracted.”
Also here, a similarly worded retraction notice followed an Expression of Concern on 22 November 2023:
“Furthermore, the editor discovered suspicious changes in authorship between the original submission and the revised version of this paper. In summary, the author names Nevzat Akkurt, Mustafa Z. Mahmoud and ElSayed M. Tag El Din were added to the revised paper without explanation and without exceptional approval by the editor, which is contrary to the journal policy on changes to authorship.
The authors failed to provide a satisfactory explanation to the above points.”
I would have rather asked the editorial staff for a satisfactory explanation, why such things happen “unnoticed”. But then again, Elsevier is extremely cunning and unscrupulous in their business, and that’s why it is so immensely successful.
Notice of Violation
IEEE Xplore, the publishing platform by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), did something very strange. They mass-non-retracted papermill fraud; usually they mass-publish it, and then do nothing despite the evidence. Here, they did at least something, but not really something adequate.
In this mass action, a dozen of papers “authored” by a certain Hamid Reza Karimi were affected with this “Notice of Violation of IEEE Publication Principles“, which consisted of adding this opening sentence to the paper’s abstract:
“After careful consideration by a duly constituted committee, an author of this article, Hamid Reza Karimi, was found to have acted in violation of the IEEE Principles of Ethical Publishing by artificially inflating the number of citations to this article.”
That’s it. There are no retractions actually, just these strange notices, because this is IEEE and they don’t believe in retractions.
Science Breakthroughs
67% stock surge
Autism has been, once again, cured. This time, with another anti-parasitic medicine, suramin (Christian Perronne used chloroquine).
France is enthralled by the charm of Professor Christian Perronne. With COVID-19 almost vanquished by chloroquine magic, what about the Chronic Lyme Disease? Smut Clyde goes where even Didier Raoult refused to go.
“There is a critical need for effective treatment of the core symptoms of autism spectrum disorder (ASD). The purinergic antagonist suramin may improve core symptoms through restoration of normal mitochondrial function and reduction of neuro-inflammation via its known antagonism of P2X and P2Y receptors. […] We conducted a 14 week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled proof -of-concept study (N = 52) to test the efficacy and safety of suramin intravenous infusions in boys aged 4–15 years with moderate to severe ASD. […] Forty-four subjects completed the study. The 10 mg/kg suramin group showed a greater, but statistically non-significant, numeric improvement (− 12.5 ± 3.18 [mean ± SE]) vs. placebo (− 8.9 ± 2.86) in ABC-Core at Week 14. The 20 mg/kg suramin group did not show improvement over placebo.”
The real reason why suramin’s placebo effect on autistic children disappears at higher concentration is because this medicine, prescribed against parasites causing African sleeping sickness and river blindness, is toxic and has many unpleasant side effects.
Reuterswarned in February 2023 not to use suramin as autism drug just yet. More research needed, etc:
“A small, FDA-approved phase 1 clinical trial in 2017 tested suramin’s effect on certain “core” autism symptoms in five boys, as compared with five boys given a placebo. The study found small, temporary improvements in scores on a diagnostic assessment for autism known as the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule, 2nd edition (ADOS-2) examination (here). However, no significant changes were reported for any other tests used, and the authors pointed to the limitations of the experiment and its small size, writing that they “strongly caution against the unauthorized use of suramin” in the study’s conclusion.
Dr. Robert Naviaux, the study’s lead author and a professor of medicine, pediatrics and pathology at the University of California, San Diego (here), told Reuters that the trial found suramin might help treat symptoms of ASD, including speech and language delay, difficulty with nonverbal social communication, and restricted or repetitive behaviors or interests.”
Smut Clyde briefly wrote about the autism quackery of Robert Naviaux in the article below, mentioning that he used to research the health benefits of dark chocolate for diabetics (Taub et al 2012) before inventing autistic mice he could cure with suramin (Naviaux et al 2013). Read here:
A mysterious clinical trial in Israel is recruiting autistic children for blood draws. As the company’s founder admitted, the actual therapy on offer is extraction of bone marrow “stem cells” and their injection into patient’s spine. Smut Clyde investigates.
Now, in the Hough et al 2023 BMC paper, these competing interests are declared:
“Two of the authors (Derby, Rome) are employees and hold stock in PaxMedica, Inc. Drs. Hough, Mao, Aman, Lozano, Martinez-Cerdeno, and Findling are paid scientific consultants. Dr. Smith-Hicks receives research support from the Kennedy Krieger Institute, which has an institutional agreement with PaxMedica, Inc.”
Actually, Hough is lying, he is PaxMedica’s Chief Medical Officer, not just consultant. The company PaxMedica claims to have pushed their autism drug suramin into phase 3 clinical stage. Naviaux sits of its Advisory Board, together with other coauthors of this recent study, which helped PaxMedica to “a nearly 67% surge in its stock“.
Our aim is to find a cure
Newsweek swallowed a press release by the University of Texas El Paso and now informs us that a cure was found for Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s, dementia and all other brain disorders “triggered by factors including obesity, age, and exposure to pesticides and other toxic environmental chemicals.” And this cure are nanoparticles, made from coffee waste! Specifically, the so-called “caffeic-acid based carbon quantum dots“, even an abbreviation was created to help it enter medicine textbooks: “CACQDs“.
“Caffeic-acid based Carbon Quantum Dots have the potential to be transformative in the treatment of neurodegenerative disorders,” paper co-author Jyotish Kumar, a doctoral student in the Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry at The University of Texas at El Paso, said in a statement. “This is because none of the current treatments resolve the diseases; they only help manage the symptoms. Our aim is to find a cure by addressing the atomic and molecular underpinnings that drive these conditions.” […]
The sequelae to neurodegeneration are multifactorial, according to Mahesh Narayan, a professor at The University of Texas at El Paso, fellow of the Royal Society of Chemistry, and paper co-author.
“Proteins misfold and separately, free radicals are generated. Both events cause neuronal damage, injury and demise,” he told Newsweek. “CQDs (CACQDs here) prevent both the misfolding of proteins and scavenge free radicals and thereby show independent mechanisms of intervention and neuronal protection.”
“They are likely to be effective in many sporadic (idiopathic) forms of neurodegeneration such as Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s, Lewy Body with Dementia, Dementia with Lewy Bodies…”
This all is just plain stupid. Here is the paper, published in the Elsevier journal Environmental Research, which has zero expertise in neuroscience:
Jyotish Kumar , Sofia A. Delgado , Hemen Sarma , Mahesh Narayan Caffeic acid recarbonization: A green chemistry, sustainable carbon nano material platform to intervene in neurodegeneration induced by emerging contaminants Environmental Research (2023) doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2023.116932
To get it published in such a specialised journal, the authors had to be creative. So they just postulated something out of thin air:
“Environmental agents such as pesticides, weedicides and herbicides (collectively referred to as pesticides) are associated with the onset and pathogenesis of neurodegenerative disorders such as Parkinson’s (PD) and Alzheimer’s (AD) diseases.”
Citation needed, but I am afraid the editors and reviewers were no experts anyway.
Chocolate is good for your health, scientists keep saying. This may sound counter-intuitive; given that chocolate is an extremely calorie-rich confectionery, which mostly contains industrially refined cocoa fat and huge quantities of added sugar, a substance finally about to be recognised as the prime cause for the obesity epidemics. A recent clinical study from the…
Why coffee grounds? The authors explain it’s due to polyphenols present in health foods like coffee, chocolate and red wine, which, science says, have “antioxidant”, “immunomodulatory” and “anti-inflammatory” magic. Of course the authors are stupid enough to break their own polyphenolic logic and declare that one can make those same curative nanoparticles literally from shit:
“We used a chemically friendly (green Chemistry) approach which mimicked ‘cooking’ in hot water allowing the caffeic acid to be recarbonized into Caffeic Acid Derived Carbon Quantum Dots (CACQDs). As mentioned, they can be prepared using other organic waste matter as well,” Narayan explained.”
I suggest they start infusing themselves with their CACQDs. To prevent further progress of stupidity.
A gang of Indian nanotechnology scientists, allegedly from Annamalai University in India, placed in 2014-2015 several papers in different journals, all of them about nanoparticle synthesis using extracts from various local plants. Most papers went into the journal Spectrochimica Acta Part A: Molecular and Biomolecular Spectroscopy, published by Elsevier. The publications were harshly criticised on…
PS: The editorial board of Environmental Research lists among its associate editors the Danish papermillerChristian Sonne and a certain Jose Domingo, the latter used to be the Editor-in-Chief. Previously, this journal re-published a nasty anti-mask paper by the covidiot and telepathy lunatic Harald Walach. A study with children which was previously retracted by JAMA Paediatrics, read earlier Friday Shorts.
And you can read about Domingo’s own covidiotic antivaxxery activities here:
“a scientific journal is not a social network, not even a newspaper. People reading papers in FCT are expected to be scientists with a good basis to distinguish between trash and science.” EiC Jose Luis Domingo on new paper by Peter McCullough
The IEEE case is interesting – it sounds like it’s other papers that have cited this one incorrectly, rather than there being anything wrong with this one. According to COPE guidelines that’s not a reason to retract so they’ve done all they can (I think).
Cullen M. Taniguchi went the same way as Dipak Das. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dipak_K._Das
Maybe guilt/angst from such a high fall from the sublime (AAAS) to bathos (fraudster scorned on the internet) got to him, like it apparently did Dipak. That is a great downside of fraud. If your caught, the fall from greatness may be too much to take alive. My weak and insignificant, but reproducible pub record at least is not a soul killer.
Heartbroken to hear devastating news that Cullen Taniguchi died suddenly. A brilliant physician-scientist in #radonc, who made impacful discoveries, was an inspiring mentor, and elevated everyone around him. My condolences to his family & his friends & colleagues @MDAndersonNews
Every person I clicked on chiming in the halography is a big-wig professor some where; I think I recognized some faces connected with Anil Sood’s lab. I keep thinking this could be a great circle of fraud. This is really depressing.
I know this will likely draw condemnation of the highest order from many, but did Cullen Taniguchi’s death at 47 years have anything to do with his being obese?
The rates of obesity and diabetes, plus other morbidities such as coronary artery disease, hypertension, strokes, seem to go hand in hand. Countries which are on the porkier side such and the U.S.A, the U.K. and Germany have higher rates of diabetes than countries on the slimmer side, such as France. Should we aim to be more like the French? There may be more to it than just obesity, but it does seem to be an important factor.
I know that many find talking about obesity
offensive, and seem to confuse reasonable, mild health advice, with “fat-shaming”.
Why doesn’t Harvard put some of its endowment to good use and encourage people to eat less and exercise more. C Ronald “4 retractions” Kahn, Harvard, is not part of the solution.
“A retraction for the 80-year-old Argentina-born geneticist Francisco Baralle, director of the International Centre for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology (ICGEB) in Trieste, Italy.”
Mortgage paid, money in the bank. House and money will be somebody’s inheritance soon. I bet they will complain about the inheritance tax!
Forget about curing obesity in the USA. Here, its all about freedoms: to do whatever the f*ck you want, which includes complete freedom to eat crappy food, sit on your lazy ass and make stupid tweets on X, and, in the process, morphing into a fat hog-like appearance of ones self without ridicule, and still be sexy (physically attractive to the opposite sex enough for mating) at the same time. Think Lizzo.
If you cannot think this way you are evil. I am skinny, and so I am evil as well by association; I am a skinny bastard, and slender women are skinny bitches. Understand? No wonder I’m an incell: I dont think about this correctly.
Judging from the pictures I’ve seen, Taniguchi was overweight, I’m doubtful if he was obese (BMI over 30). We will have to wait and see what he died of, but, IMO, it could be what I said above: the fall from sublime to bathos got him.
Achraf El Kasmi , Zhen-Yu Tian , Henning Vieker , André Beyer , Tarik Chafik
Innovative CVD synthesis of Cu2O catalysts for CO oxidation Applied Catalysis B Environmental (2016) doi: 10.1016/j.apcatb.2015.12.034
I know, Impact Factor 22, but still I believe those Bielefeld Spectra are hand-drawn.
On an unrelated topic, what do you suggest students should do when their labs are knowingly publishing research papers with erroneous data? Given that the funding agencies (in EU) and publishers show little interest in retracting such papers it seems there aren’t any options to right the wrong.
I’ve already graduated from the university so I’m not part of their lab anymore. The funding agency (EU-REA) has no interest in investigating allegations of misconduct and the publishers seem more interested in soliciting formal criticism from the whistleblowers so that they can publish it in the journals. As someone whose thesis was stolen and published in a journal, it hurts that the situation is bad. And as someone who is aware of the erroneous data in other articles, it’s disappointing that the pseudoscience is not going to go away.
Sehr geehrter Herr Schneider, Sie leisten eine derart engagierte und wichtige Arbeit – “leider” eben erst entdeckt werde ich ihre Seiten regelmäßig aufsuchen. Ich danke Ihnen! Und bin erstmal sehr zurückhaltend, denn ich bin nicht in der Lage jetzt schon etwas zu spenden. Ich arbeite dran. Jedenfalls danke ich Ihnen, dass Sie dabei sind!
– Ich stehe gerne dazu, dass dieser hier vorgetragene Dank sehr emotional gefärbt ist und insofern garnicht naturwissenschaftlich von “interesselosem Interesse” und Emotionslosigkeit” getragen sei.
– Oft wünsche ich, es würde in unseren Schulen (ja, bereits .- und bald auch in Kindergärten, (denn wer will unsere jüngsten Kinder noch für so dumm halten, wie es bisher geschah, und viele davon dann dazu machen)), Hochschulen und Universitäten Systemtheorie, Wissenschaftstheorie und Wissenschaftsgeschichte gelehrt werden. Und dies müsste obligatorisch in allen wissenschaftlichen und ingenieurartigen Studiengängen geschehen. Naturwissenschaften ohne diese Initiation kann zur Waffe gebraucht werden (die sich nachweislich leicht gegen uns menschen selbst richten lässt).
– Unter sehr vielem anderen könnte bei ordentlicher Gründung in Systemtheorie, Wissenschaftstheorie und Wissenschaftsgeschichte niemand mehr darauf kommen, eine Aussage á la “eine überwältigende Mehrheit von Wissenschaftlern vertritt diese Auffassung…” (mit dem Kontext “dann muss es ja richtig sein”) als überzeugendes Arguement dafür zu nehmen, dass “diese Aussage” auf Grund einer MEHRHEIT(!!!) richtig sein müsse.
– Es käme dann auch niemand mehr auf die Idee zu glauben, mit Naturwissenschaften könne ein Mensch die Natur verstehen.
– Es käme auch niemand mehr auf die Idee zu glauben, wir wären mit den Naturwissenschaften der aktuellen Konstruktion in der Lage die Natur auch nur einigermaßen angemessen zu beschreiben resp. Vorhersagen z.B. durch “Modelle” zu treffen.
– Zudem dürfen wir akzeptieren, dass der Horizont von uns Mitmenschen sehr unterschiedlich ist und dass der weite resp. überschauende Horizont ebenso selten ist, wie der echte inhaltliche und zugleich breit wissende Tiefgang unter uns Menschen vertreten ist. U.a. infolge unserer frühesten Einführung in die “Bildungswelt” geht sehr vielen Kindern ihre angeborene “Geniekraft” veloren. Wir wissen (oder sollten es) woher unser Bildungssystem kommt. Seit Friedrich dem Großen und allen Folgenden Schrittmachern der Pädagogik gelang es nicht aus dem Fahrwasser herauszukommen, dass in “Die Lümmel von der ersten Bank” oder der “Feuerzangenbowle” beshrieben wird. Wie die “Märchen” der Astrid Lindgren oder des Michael Ende fanden sie nicht die Pezeption, die aufklärende Wirkung in allen Altersklassen unserer Gesellschaft – diese würde dann ganz anders aussehen. Die Genialität der Frage Pippi Langstrumpfs an ihre Lehrerin “Warum fragst du mich das? Weißt du es denn nicht selbst?”(sinngemäß zitiert) war kein Kinderjoke, sondern beschrieb und beschreibt eine unglaublich platte Lehrmethodik. Die verdirbt den Kindern den Spaß am Lernen und vor allem an der eigenen Phantasie (ein paar kommen bekanntlich “trotzdem” sehr gut durch, aber das ist kein PLUS für die Methodik). Viele Kinder treibt es allerdings in eine Art innere Emigration, in der Folge, dass sie sich anpassen, und irgendwann “gut” im Sinne der Schulnotenwelt werden – und daraus auch ihr EGO nähren. DSie wachsen auch in unsere kranke “Konkurrenzwelt” hinein. … Sagte ein Prof. in der ersten Stunde/erstes Se,ester: “schauen sie mal nach links und nach rechts. Wen sie da sehen – das sind in drei Jahren ihre Konkurrenten um Stelle und Karriere”. … Zu den Ergebnissen, angeschts derer wir immer noch stets wieder zur Tagesordnung gehen ist der Herzinfarkt mit 35-50, die Scheidung Nr. 1 ab 30-45 und die Aussage des Kindes zum Nachbarkind “mein Papa arbeitet aber mehr als 68 Stunden pro Tag” (anders gesagt “… ist “fleißiger” / “wichtiger” / als deiner, ätsch!”). Wer aus dieser gesellschaftlich akzeptierten (“so ist das eben”) Psychose herausfällt, könnte bei der plötzlich ogar Systmtheorie oder Psychologie entdeckenden Selbstrecherche auf ein Prinzip stoßen, demzufolge die bedeutender Leistung dadurch entsteht, dass ein Mensch statt 70% seiner Zeit zu arbeiten und 30% zu ruhen genau umgekehrt 30% Arbeit und 70% einschaltet .-.. Dann ist i.d.R. für den bisher erklommenen Arbeitsplkatz unfähig geworden. Er ernt dann auch den Unterschied von Erfolg und Gelingen – und wir vielleicht erkennen, dass er sich nicht einmal “böse” sein muss, DASS ER AUF ERFOLG SETZTE statt auf GELINGEN. –
– Wie alles so zu dem Heuztigen gekommen ist, schaut unsere Gesellschaft noch immer recht ungerührt auf die Kriterien des Erfolgs, die nach Euro oder Dollar qualifiziert werden. Der Nicht-Wissenschaftler Horst Stern sagte es so “sie kennen den Preis von allem und den Wert von Nichts”, weshalb wir heute (fast alle) ungerührt zusehen, wenn für Investoren wertvolle Baumhölzer gerodet werden, damit sie in den Genuss des “Ertrags” aus Wind kommen, und andere ihnen dies dann sogar als gemeinnützig “im Dienste des Kampfs gegen den Klimawandel” schön waschen. Wobei wir wiederum wissen, dass gemäß “Actio et Reactio” jedem Kampf ein Gegenkampf erwächst, der den Gewinn aus Kampf zu Null (Bestenfalls) neutralisiert, jedoch infolge der “Reibung” in vielfacher Erscheinungsform (siehe Ausbeute beim Carnotschen Kreisprozess, etc.) sogar zu negativen Werten oder Erscheinungen führt.
– Wir sehen ein weiteres Ergebnis unserer “eigenartigen” Handlungsweise in Bildung und Beruf in der Wertschärtzung des Begriffs Naturschutz und derer die ihn ausüben. Unsere Gesellschaft umgeht die Tatsache, dass sie als Ganzes von Natur abhängig sei. Statt Naturschutz über alle Sektoralität unserer Nutzungsformen der Umwelt udn Umgebung(!) zu stellen – und jede Maßnahme, die von einer Nutzung oder einer Eingrifsdisziplin ausgeführt werden möchte, zuerst an der Verträglichkeit mit Natur zu prüfen, und die Genehmigung zu versagen, wenn Natur verbraucht, gestört, verschmutzt etc. wird, genehmigen wir drauflkos, weil es “die Wirtschaft” fördert und nachher sehen wir die Schäden und unsere Volkswirtschaft kann sich freuen, denn die Verschmutzung geht weiter und die Reinigung davon eribt weitere Berufe und Aufgabengebiete die nun ebenfalls Geld verdienen. usw …
– Eine unschöne Folge des Ganzen ist, dass unsere Gesellschaft die “Alten” rech frühzeitig körperlich und geistig zur Ruhe bringt. Das ergibt sich aus einem Giftcocktail, der den Menschen ab Kindheit aus Luft, Wasser (Fluoridierung/Chlorung etc.) und Nahrung (Chemiedünger/Biozide/”Medikamente”) in Körper und Geist (verschmutzte Information… – an sich wissen wir …) übertrgen wird – und auch zu diesen Maßnahmen Berufsbilder entstanden. Und weithin alle Mitmenschen schauen längst reglos den “Giftstreifen im Acker zu, wo ihr Brotgetreide wächst” (oder stellen sich zur spirituellen Meditation sogar genau in ihre Mitte) oder lassen sich auf die folgenschwere Aussagen “… man weiß ja auch nicht, was im “BIO” drin ist…” oder “… ohne die Agrochemie können wir die Weltbevölkerung nicht enähren…”. Ich nenne diese Aussagen “folgenschwer”, weil sie erfolgreich die Kraft nehmen, die Falschheit der Aussaag zu erkennen.
, Luigi Nezi , Giannicola Genovese , Angela K. Deem , Avnish Kapoor , Wantong Yao , Emanuela Brunetto , Ya’an Kang , Min Yuan, John M. Asara, Y. Alan Wang, Timothy P. Heffernan, Alec C. Kimmelman, Huamin Wang, Jason B. Fleming, Lewis C. Cantley, Ronald A. DePinho, Giulio F. Draetta Oncogene ablation-resistant pancreatic cancer cells depend on mitochondrial function Nature (2014) doi: 10.1038/nature13611 
For Better Science 
Previous exercise in “green chemistry” from El Paso: https://www.pubpeer.com/publications/94FE6E1D10EAB7F1709F77258AE579.
No common faces with the present one, as this older study was led by El Paso’s Md Ariful Ahsan, a Shalan-bound dude. Also Rafa Luque was on board!
This university has form in nanochemistry. And not only, also the Arash Karimipour / Jorge de Brito engineering affair!
LikeLike
UT El Paso seems to be recycling their cafeteria waste. Now spent tea leaves.
LikeLike
“Maddalena Donzelli , Massimo Squatrito , Dvora Ganoth , Avram Hershko , Michele Pagano , Giulio F Draetta Dual mode of degradation of Cdc25 A phosphatase The EMBO Journal (2002) doi: 10.1093/emboj/cdf491”
Avram Hershko
https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/chemistry/2004/hershko/facts/
LikeLike
Oh. This paper obviously can’t be retracted.
LikeLike
The IEEE case is interesting – it sounds like it’s other papers that have cited this one incorrectly, rather than there being anything wrong with this one. According to COPE guidelines that’s not a reason to retract so they’ve done all they can (I think).
LikeLike
David Kirsch laments the passing of Cullen M. Taniguchi how sad… David also publishes with Sam S Yoon, small world!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Cullen M. Taniguchi went the same way as Dipak Das.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dipak_K._Das
Maybe guilt/angst from such a high fall from the sublime (AAAS) to bathos (fraudster scorned on the internet) got to him, like it apparently did Dipak. That is a great downside of fraud. If your caught, the fall from greatness may be too much to take alive. My weak and insignificant, but reproducible pub record at least is not a soul killer.
LikeLike
Comment thread about Taniguchi:
Every person I clicked on chiming in the halography is a big-wig professor some where; I think I recognized some faces connected with Anil Sood’s lab. I keep thinking this could be a great circle of fraud. This is really depressing.
LikeLike
It is a great big circle of fraud. I do wonders though: Is it all a.show? Or – Do they really believe they are curing cancer?
LikeLike
World-saving cures are not coming from this circle-jerk of radiation oncologists. Instead, they come from under-funded post-docs like Katalin Karikó.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I know this will likely draw condemnation of the highest order from many, but did Cullen Taniguchi’s death at 47 years have anything to do with his being obese?
The rates of obesity and diabetes, plus other morbidities such as coronary artery disease, hypertension, strokes, seem to go hand in hand. Countries which are on the porkier side such and the U.S.A, the U.K. and Germany have higher rates of diabetes than countries on the slimmer side, such as France. Should we aim to be more like the French? There may be more to it than just obesity, but it does seem to be an important factor.
I know that many find talking about obesity
offensive, and seem to confuse reasonable, mild health advice, with “fat-shaming”.
Why doesn’t Harvard put some of its endowment to good use and encourage people to eat less and exercise more. C Ronald “4 retractions” Kahn, Harvard, is not part of the solution.
LikeLike
“A retraction for the 80-year-old Argentina-born geneticist Francisco Baralle, director of the International Centre for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology (ICGEB) in Trieste, Italy.”
Mortgage paid, money in the bank. House and money will be somebody’s inheritance soon. I bet they will complain about the inheritance tax!
LikeLike
Forget about curing obesity in the USA. Here, its all about freedoms: to do whatever the f*ck you want, which includes complete freedom to eat crappy food, sit on your lazy ass and make stupid tweets on X, and, in the process, morphing into a fat hog-like appearance of ones self without ridicule, and still be sexy (physically attractive to the opposite sex enough for mating) at the same time. Think Lizzo.
If you cannot think this way you are evil. I am skinny, and so I am evil as well by association; I am a skinny bastard, and slender women are skinny bitches. Understand? No wonder I’m an incell: I dont think about this correctly.
Judging from the pictures I’ve seen, Taniguchi was overweight, I’m doubtful if he was obese (BMI over 30). We will have to wait and see what he died of, but, IMO, it could be what I said above: the fall from sublime to bathos got him.
LikeLike
Achraf El Kasmi , Zhen-Yu Tian , Henning Vieker , André Beyer , Tarik Chafik
Innovative CVD synthesis of Cu2O catalysts for CO oxidation
Applied Catalysis B Environmental (2016) doi: 10.1016/j.apcatb.2015.12.034
I know, Impact Factor 22, but still I believe those Bielefeld Spectra are hand-drawn.
LikeLike
Reused 3 years later.
https://pubpeer.com/publications/4A192B245FE4D5C8521F9B6EF00F2B
LikeLike
On an unrelated topic, what do you suggest students should do when their labs are knowingly publishing research papers with erroneous data? Given that the funding agencies (in EU) and publishers show little interest in retracting such papers it seems there aren’t any options to right the wrong.
LikeLike
I advise to leave such labs and where possible, report them to funders and other authorities.
LikeLike
I’ve already graduated from the university so I’m not part of their lab anymore. The funding agency (EU-REA) has no interest in investigating allegations of misconduct and the publishers seem more interested in soliciting formal criticism from the whistleblowers so that they can publish it in the journals. As someone whose thesis was stolen and published in a journal, it hurts that the situation is bad. And as someone who is aware of the erroneous data in other articles, it’s disappointing that the pseudoscience is not going to go away.
LikeLike
Hi, whose lab are you talking about here?
LikeLike
Prof. Jules van Lier (TU Delft, the Netherlands): https://www.tudelft.nl/en/ceg/about-faculty/departments/watermanagement/research/waterlab
LikeLike
doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2023.10.025
What do you think of this article, I suspect that the sleep deprivation method used by the authors causes the mice to inhale water
LikeLike
Wow, a Cell paper. Which means it is not some pedestrian amateur forgery, but a high quality fraud project.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2023.10.025
LikeLike
Sehr geehrter Herr Schneider, Sie leisten eine derart engagierte und wichtige Arbeit – “leider” eben erst entdeckt werde ich ihre Seiten regelmäßig aufsuchen. Ich danke Ihnen! Und bin erstmal sehr zurückhaltend, denn ich bin nicht in der Lage jetzt schon etwas zu spenden. Ich arbeite dran. Jedenfalls danke ich Ihnen, dass Sie dabei sind!
– Ich stehe gerne dazu, dass dieser hier vorgetragene Dank sehr emotional gefärbt ist und insofern garnicht naturwissenschaftlich von “interesselosem Interesse” und Emotionslosigkeit” getragen sei.
– Oft wünsche ich, es würde in unseren Schulen (ja, bereits .- und bald auch in Kindergärten, (denn wer will unsere jüngsten Kinder noch für so dumm halten, wie es bisher geschah, und viele davon dann dazu machen)), Hochschulen und Universitäten Systemtheorie, Wissenschaftstheorie und Wissenschaftsgeschichte gelehrt werden. Und dies müsste obligatorisch in allen wissenschaftlichen und ingenieurartigen Studiengängen geschehen. Naturwissenschaften ohne diese Initiation kann zur Waffe gebraucht werden (die sich nachweislich leicht gegen uns menschen selbst richten lässt).
– Unter sehr vielem anderen könnte bei ordentlicher Gründung in Systemtheorie, Wissenschaftstheorie und Wissenschaftsgeschichte niemand mehr darauf kommen, eine Aussage á la “eine überwältigende Mehrheit von Wissenschaftlern vertritt diese Auffassung…” (mit dem Kontext “dann muss es ja richtig sein”) als überzeugendes Arguement dafür zu nehmen, dass “diese Aussage” auf Grund einer MEHRHEIT(!!!) richtig sein müsse.
– Es käme dann auch niemand mehr auf die Idee zu glauben, mit Naturwissenschaften könne ein Mensch die Natur verstehen.
– Es käme auch niemand mehr auf die Idee zu glauben, wir wären mit den Naturwissenschaften der aktuellen Konstruktion in der Lage die Natur auch nur einigermaßen angemessen zu beschreiben resp. Vorhersagen z.B. durch “Modelle” zu treffen.
– Zudem dürfen wir akzeptieren, dass der Horizont von uns Mitmenschen sehr unterschiedlich ist und dass der weite resp. überschauende Horizont ebenso selten ist, wie der echte inhaltliche und zugleich breit wissende Tiefgang unter uns Menschen vertreten ist. U.a. infolge unserer frühesten Einführung in die “Bildungswelt” geht sehr vielen Kindern ihre angeborene “Geniekraft” veloren. Wir wissen (oder sollten es) woher unser Bildungssystem kommt. Seit Friedrich dem Großen und allen Folgenden Schrittmachern der Pädagogik gelang es nicht aus dem Fahrwasser herauszukommen, dass in “Die Lümmel von der ersten Bank” oder der “Feuerzangenbowle” beshrieben wird. Wie die “Märchen” der Astrid Lindgren oder des Michael Ende fanden sie nicht die Pezeption, die aufklärende Wirkung in allen Altersklassen unserer Gesellschaft – diese würde dann ganz anders aussehen. Die Genialität der Frage Pippi Langstrumpfs an ihre Lehrerin “Warum fragst du mich das? Weißt du es denn nicht selbst?”(sinngemäß zitiert) war kein Kinderjoke, sondern beschrieb und beschreibt eine unglaublich platte Lehrmethodik. Die verdirbt den Kindern den Spaß am Lernen und vor allem an der eigenen Phantasie (ein paar kommen bekanntlich “trotzdem” sehr gut durch, aber das ist kein PLUS für die Methodik). Viele Kinder treibt es allerdings in eine Art innere Emigration, in der Folge, dass sie sich anpassen, und irgendwann “gut” im Sinne der Schulnotenwelt werden – und daraus auch ihr EGO nähren. DSie wachsen auch in unsere kranke “Konkurrenzwelt” hinein. … Sagte ein Prof. in der ersten Stunde/erstes Se,ester: “schauen sie mal nach links und nach rechts. Wen sie da sehen – das sind in drei Jahren ihre Konkurrenten um Stelle und Karriere”. … Zu den Ergebnissen, angeschts derer wir immer noch stets wieder zur Tagesordnung gehen ist der Herzinfarkt mit 35-50, die Scheidung Nr. 1 ab 30-45 und die Aussage des Kindes zum Nachbarkind “mein Papa arbeitet aber mehr als 68 Stunden pro Tag” (anders gesagt “… ist “fleißiger” / “wichtiger” / als deiner, ätsch!”). Wer aus dieser gesellschaftlich akzeptierten (“so ist das eben”) Psychose herausfällt, könnte bei der plötzlich ogar Systmtheorie oder Psychologie entdeckenden Selbstrecherche auf ein Prinzip stoßen, demzufolge die bedeutender Leistung dadurch entsteht, dass ein Mensch statt 70% seiner Zeit zu arbeiten und 30% zu ruhen genau umgekehrt 30% Arbeit und 70% einschaltet .-.. Dann ist i.d.R. für den bisher erklommenen Arbeitsplkatz unfähig geworden. Er ernt dann auch den Unterschied von Erfolg und Gelingen – und wir vielleicht erkennen, dass er sich nicht einmal “böse” sein muss, DASS ER AUF ERFOLG SETZTE statt auf GELINGEN. –
– Wie alles so zu dem Heuztigen gekommen ist, schaut unsere Gesellschaft noch immer recht ungerührt auf die Kriterien des Erfolgs, die nach Euro oder Dollar qualifiziert werden. Der Nicht-Wissenschaftler Horst Stern sagte es so “sie kennen den Preis von allem und den Wert von Nichts”, weshalb wir heute (fast alle) ungerührt zusehen, wenn für Investoren wertvolle Baumhölzer gerodet werden, damit sie in den Genuss des “Ertrags” aus Wind kommen, und andere ihnen dies dann sogar als gemeinnützig “im Dienste des Kampfs gegen den Klimawandel” schön waschen. Wobei wir wiederum wissen, dass gemäß “Actio et Reactio” jedem Kampf ein Gegenkampf erwächst, der den Gewinn aus Kampf zu Null (Bestenfalls) neutralisiert, jedoch infolge der “Reibung” in vielfacher Erscheinungsform (siehe Ausbeute beim Carnotschen Kreisprozess, etc.) sogar zu negativen Werten oder Erscheinungen führt.
– Wir sehen ein weiteres Ergebnis unserer “eigenartigen” Handlungsweise in Bildung und Beruf in der Wertschärtzung des Begriffs Naturschutz und derer die ihn ausüben. Unsere Gesellschaft umgeht die Tatsache, dass sie als Ganzes von Natur abhängig sei. Statt Naturschutz über alle Sektoralität unserer Nutzungsformen der Umwelt udn Umgebung(!) zu stellen – und jede Maßnahme, die von einer Nutzung oder einer Eingrifsdisziplin ausgeführt werden möchte, zuerst an der Verträglichkeit mit Natur zu prüfen, und die Genehmigung zu versagen, wenn Natur verbraucht, gestört, verschmutzt etc. wird, genehmigen wir drauflkos, weil es “die Wirtschaft” fördert und nachher sehen wir die Schäden und unsere Volkswirtschaft kann sich freuen, denn die Verschmutzung geht weiter und die Reinigung davon eribt weitere Berufe und Aufgabengebiete die nun ebenfalls Geld verdienen. usw …
– Eine unschöne Folge des Ganzen ist, dass unsere Gesellschaft die “Alten” rech frühzeitig körperlich und geistig zur Ruhe bringt. Das ergibt sich aus einem Giftcocktail, der den Menschen ab Kindheit aus Luft, Wasser (Fluoridierung/Chlorung etc.) und Nahrung (Chemiedünger/Biozide/”Medikamente”) in Körper und Geist (verschmutzte Information… – an sich wissen wir …) übertrgen wird – und auch zu diesen Maßnahmen Berufsbilder entstanden. Und weithin alle Mitmenschen schauen längst reglos den “Giftstreifen im Acker zu, wo ihr Brotgetreide wächst” (oder stellen sich zur spirituellen Meditation sogar genau in ihre Mitte) oder lassen sich auf die folgenschwere Aussagen “… man weiß ja auch nicht, was im “BIO” drin ist…” oder “… ohne die Agrochemie können wir die Weltbevölkerung nicht enähren…”. Ich nenne diese Aussagen “folgenschwer”, weil sie erfolgreich die Kraft nehmen, die Falschheit der Aussaag zu erkennen.
LikeLike
Ich freue mich nun, hier sein zu dür
fen und wünsche alles Gute ! youtube.com/berndgerken etc.
LikeLike
“The institution referred the matter back to the authors – journal trying to deal with Francisco Baralle”
10 April 2024 retraction for Francisco Baralle.
Retraction of ‘Dissecting the splicing mechanism of the Drosophila editing enzyme; dADAR’ | Nucleic Acids Research | Oxford Academic (oup.com)
LikeLike