By the time Shiladitya Sen was officially declared guilty of research misconduct in 2018 by U.S. federal officials, The Ohio State University had long since stripped him of his doctorate in chemistry.
Years later, however, Sen is still billing himself as a PhD in the signature of his work email at a company that provides lab mice and other animals to many scientists, Retraction Watch has learned.
Sen, now a director of analytical chemistry at Charles River Laboratories, with headquarters in Wilmington, Mass., confirmed to us by phone that he has not earned another doctoral degree. He hung up when asked why his email signature claims he has a PhD.
According to an investigation by the U.S. Office of Research Integrity (ORI), Sen “knowingly and intentionally” falsified and/or fabricated data in a now-retracted 2013 paper in PNAS, his PhD thesis, a poster presentation, and two grant applications to the National Institutes of Health. He agreed not to seek federal funding for three years.
A Charles River Laboratories spokesperson told us company’s policy is “not to comment on employees of Charles River.”
Like Retraction Watch? You can make a tax-deductible contribution to support our work, follow us on Twitter, like us on Facebook, add us to your RSS reader, or subscribe to our daily digest. If you find a retraction that’s not in our database, you can let us know here. For comments or feedback, email us at [email protected].
It’s company policy not to comment on its own employees?
He did not apply with a PhD so it’s all null and void
Is misrepresenting yourself, and claiming to be PhD qualified, under conditions where the doctorate is essentially nullified – fraud? I would like to trust Charles River Labs for the services they provide. However, this has been placed in grave doubt, and my confidence is significantly dampened by Charles River employing a scientist that has been found to be officially declared guilty of research misconduct in 2018 by U.S. federal officials. Turns out then, that the Ohio State University had long since stripped him of his doctorate in chemistry. And then, years later, however, Sen is still billing himself as a Ph.D. in the signature of his work email at Charles River – a company that provides lab mice and other animals to many scientists.
This truly saddens me. Mr. Sen has to do what he has to do. but it seems more and more, we are seeing biological and chemical scientists get away with flagrant fraud and misconduct, only to be rewarded with a high-paying and nicely titled position at a relatively secure position. This has to be so depressing and disappointing to all the hard-working and ethically complying scientists out there. I hope to God that “fraud pays” becomes an acceptable norm for career advancement and promotional aspirations. When that happens, it is essentially game over, and the public already doubts the integrity of academic and industry science.
Bunch of words. Dude apply to job with his BSc. The rest is it, nothing here.
How do you know he applied with his BSc?
And how does it justify him using a title that he does not have?
I’m intrigued by the number of recent posts justifying misconduct or misrepresentation, here and on the Korean researcher thread. Are there really that many people who want to support waste, fraud and abuse? Or, are there a few people seeking to muddy the waters?
I wonder why his case summary has been taken down from ORI’s site.
George Santos is every where
How does it matter?
I guess it doesn’t! I faked my degree and now work as senior team lead at the power plant close to your house. Hope no one finds out!
Don’t mind the hater 🤣🤣🤣😂 Uday. These people are getting their knickers in a twist because one of their labels at work read PhD. I change my label every day. I have 5😁😁😁
It matters because someone who commits fraud as the director of analytical chemistry completely undermines the reputation of the institution and trust anyone should have in their products. Furthermore, now that they have been made aware of it, if they weren’t already, a lack of action undermines the trust even more. Scientist have to trust where they get their supplies and subjects to a degree (they should also test of course).
No wonder Charles River mice vary so much from one batch to another. If a data fabricator is their director of analytical chemistry, I bet they’re cool with all their health reports being fake too.
Glad I switched to Envigo.
One question worth asking is whether this company might (somehow) receive Federal Funds? If so, they might have signed a Corporate Integrity Agreement, which basically states that any employee engaged on federal programs has no current federal action against them, such as a Res Misc Finding. (ORI was once asked to alter the duration of its PHS finding so that the respondent could be promoted. We declined.)
Why does it matter? Charles River Labs is one of the main toxicology testing organizations for all industries (not just pharma).
CRL notes it “expedite the discovery, early-stage development and safe manufacture of novel drugs and therapeutics”. Imagine how quickly Charles River Labs can expedite this process thru employing individuals who knowingly fabricate data (no QA needed).
It’s back to the future. We have Good Laboratory Practices largely because of a company called Industrial Bio-Test laboratories was found to have incredibly poor quality approaches in their tox studies. This burned so many companies that they created in-house tox labs so they could monitor the quality of the work.
However, the memory of IBT has waned and most companies now rely on the “quality” of companies like CRL. Maybe
CRL should re-name themselves “Industrial Bio-Test Laboratories”?
There are various potential legal issues associated with misrepresenting your qualifications or credentials, particularly in professional or academic settings. Some examples of potential legal issues are:
1. False advertising: If you misrepresent your credentials in a way that can be construed as false advertising, you could face legal consequences under consumer protection laws.
2. Fraud: If you misrepresent your qualifications or credentials with the intent to deceive others and obtain some kind of benefit, you could be charged with fraud.
3. Contractual obligations: If you misrepresent your qualifications or credentials in a contractual agreement, such as a client contract, you could be in breach of contract and could face legal consequences. Charles river lab is a contract research organization for both government and non-government projects he may have signed several protocols and agreements.
4. From the other ORI/NIH publication he was to exclude voluntarily from any contracting or subcontracting with any agency of the US Government from June 2018 – for 3 years (https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-18-189.html). However, he was with Charles river laboratories during this period.
5. If you see Charles river laboratory employees on LinkedIn, it is very rare to none to find a person with less than 10 years of experience to hold such a senior position. Something fishy also here.
It is important to note that the specific legal issues associated with misrepresenting your qualifications or credentials can vary. This guy is not trustworthy and too much administrative position for fabricator.
Anyone reading this should contact Charles River and let them know what they think.