By Leonid Schneider, on research integrity, biomedical ethics and academic publishing
“Expressions of Concern may be used as an interim notice to flag a potential issue that may be ultimately resolved with another amendment outcome (e.g. retraction or correction) or they may remain as the final outcome in cases where conclusive evidence cannot be obtained. ” – COPE
Schneider Shorts 17.01.2025 – Ex-rector acquitted in Germany, YouTube couple guilty of fraud in Sweden, papermiller kicked out in Poland, with a whodunit retraction, retractions for papermillers and russian scamferencers, and finally, testing the limits of permissible in scholarly publishing.
The Schneider Rule teaches that if you wish to meet many science cheaters you must follow one of them.
Schneider Shorts 28.06.2024 – sex advice from an Italian in Munich, life extension from MD Anderson boss, how to set up a review network, with a spot-the difference game, retractions for Temple Italians, a heroic editor, and finally, a Nigerian scam to cure all diseases!
Schneider Shorts 2.02.2024 – Three stories about Dana Farber (including a Nobelist!), two stories about the Lille papermille (including a game!), with an “honest” plant scientist, doctors being rewarded, amazing corrections and informative retractions, and how another Nobelist’s cell therapy business ended up unsold.
“Imagine what mistakes might be found in the raw data if anyone was allowed to look!” – Sholto David
“The President’s goal of ending cancer as we know it today is grounded, in part, in the work of scientific discovery that Ned Sharpless has led at NCI”
“PCR reactions run on agarose gels commonly look similar due to artifacts introduced by the agarose gel and comb.” Dr Elsa R Flores, Associate Director, Moffitt Cancer Center
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 Better Science