The Teachings of Chairman Cao
The immunologist Xuetao Cao is one of the most important scientists in China. The Academician and General is also Chairman of research integrity of all Chinese research. Now Elisabeth Bik scrutinised his papers.
By Leonid Schneider, on research integrity, biomedical ethics and academic publishing
The immunologist Xuetao Cao is one of the most important scientists in China. The Academician and General is also Chairman of research integrity of all Chinese research. Now Elisabeth Bik scrutinised his papers.
This guest post invites you to join the hunt for fabricated data in your science field of interest. Use Google image search to #CleanYourScience!
Smut Clyde complained of his eyes hurting from all these repetitive patterns in neuron recordings. He now recovered, and wrote this report, about rat torturers of Michigan.
Smut Clyde goes nanotechnology again and disagrees with Royal Society of Chemistry and the Chinese authorities on how honest a researcher Mi-Cong Jin is.
If you thought you already saw the worst research fraud from China, here comes the next level. Anything goes to please the Communist Party and to advance own academic career under the oppressive regime.
Li Jia is Chinese cancer researcher apparently training for Fraud Olympics. She fabricates data at speed and excess, and in several disciplines.
In this guest post by Smut Clyde and Tiger BB8 you will witness a publication practice you would never have thought possible. Even from China. Even at Elsevier.
Dentistry professors at UCLA published manipulated data in top-level journals. When a colleague reported them, the university retaliated against the whistleblower.
Royal Society of Chemistry published a research paper which unashamedly peddled TCM, under the title: “Probing the Qi of traditional Chinese herbal medicines by the biological synthesis of nano-Au”. Both Editor-in-Chief and publisher executive saw no problem there because the paper passed peer review.
A cancer research professor in China runs a paper mill, sources claim he sells first authorships for a bribe. Problem for his customers: the peer-reviewed papers they pay for, contain fake data.