Science journalism by Leonid Schneider, on research integrity and academic publishing in life sciences and biomedicine
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.
“For TCM : Chairman Xi :: Lysenkoism : Stalin, and no Chinese academics are losing their positions because they pretended to vindicate the curative claims of TCM. Thus pratersein, genistein, didymin, helenalin, Tormentic acid and of course Trolline.”
“The relentless defence of duplicated, fabricated or falsified data is, per se, a form of serious misconduct…” Antonio Giordano, President of Sbarro Pizza Institute at Temple University
Next time you wonder why mouse research does not translate to humans, think of Domenico Pratico work on Alzheimer’s and other brain diseases.
“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
“This is electrophoresis porn, readers, a phrase that I never expected to find myself writing.” -Smut Clyde
Karin Dahlman-Wright, Karolinska Institute’s former president, then vice-president, now rector’s counsellor was found guilty of research misconduct, again. This time in 4 papers.
A review of “The Baltimore Case” by the historian Daniel Kelves and “Science Fictions” by the journalist John Crewdson, which also tell the history of the Office of Research Integrity (ORI).
Fake nanotechnology is always fun, but it does get extreme here. Word of advice: if you are in Turkey, better don’t point fingers at Professor Fatih Sen’s research. Things get broken easily.
Beware of Chinese collaborators bearing gift authorships!
