Frederik Joelving

US-backed researchers in Colombia accused of experimenting on animals, humans without approval

On January 16, inspectors from an environmental agency in western Colombia made some troubling findings. At a U.S.-funded facility supposed to be doing cutting-edge malaria research, researchers were keeping dozens of monkeys in dirty cages in poorly ventilated, over-lit enclosures. Several animals were smeared with feces. Some looked sick, and one was missing an eye. A fetid smell hung in the air. On the floor of a cage, a baby monkey lay dead.

It wasn’t the first time Fundación Centro de Primates (FUCEP) had run afoul of local authorities. In 2021, inspectors had turned up signs of “animal abuse” at the facility, located a few miles from the city of Cali, and found no veterinarian on site. Perhaps more damning, the researchers in charge did not have the permits required to experiment on or keep lab animals.

But the problems may run even deeper. According to an 18-months investigation by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), a U.S.-based animal-rights group, FUCEP’s parent organization, Caucaseco Scientific Research Consortium, apparently also conducted research in people without valid ethics approvals. These allegations have not previously been described in the media.

Exclusive: Former Tufts researcher suspended from animal work after abuse

A researcher and former faculty member at Tufts School of Medicine in Boston has been banned from working with animals for a year following repeated cases of abuse under his supervision, according to documents obtained by an animal-rights group.

In an Oct. 26, 2022, letter to the federal Office of Laboratory Animal Welfare, the university reported “serious and continuing noncompliance with” animal-welfare regulations. These breaches included “injections in mice via an unapproved route/location, failure to provide required analgesia, inadequate supportive care and monitoring, and failure to euthanize mice upon reaching the approved humane endpoints,” Tufts said.

When asked for his comments, the researcher “refuted most of the allegations and took no responsibility for his actions,” the university added.

One small error for a physicist, one giant blunder for planetary science

For a decade, scientists have been scratching their heads when trying to put a date on primeval events like the crystallization of the magma ocean on the moon or the early formation of Earth’s continental crust.

Their problem? A revised estimate of the half-life of a radioactive isotope called samarium-146 that is used to gauge the age of ancient rocks.

The updated value, published in 2012 in Science, shortened samarium-146’s half-life by a whopping 35 million years, down to 68 million years from the standard estimate of 103. This reset the clock on the solar system’s early history and suggested the oldest rocks on Earth could have formed tens of millions of years earlier than previously thought.

Paper co-authored by controversial Australian journalist earns expression of concern

One more paper co-authored by Australian health journalist Maryanne Demasi has earned an expression of concern for image duplication.

The move comes seven years after the journal Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA) was first made aware of potential problems with a figure in Demasi’s paper that showed Western blots. It marks the third time one of the former researcher’s scientific publications has been officially flagged as concerning or retracted.

Demasi, who earned her PhD from the University of Adelaide in 2004, has been in the news recently after she did a controversial interview with the lead author of a Cochrane review that cast doubt on face masks. She has drawn frequent rebuke over the past decade, beginning with a 2013 program in which her reporting questioned statins. She and her co-authors told us in 2018 that they believe her work as a journalist made her research a target of criticism.

Gov’t committee in Pakistan lets plagiarizing vice-chancellor off the hook

A government expert committee in Pakistan last year cleared a university vice-chancellor of plagiarism charges based on inconsistent claims of ignorance, Retraction Watch has learned.

The committee, which was convened by the Higher Education Commission (HEC), also appears to have flouted rules that would have held the vice-chancellor responsible even if he had no knowledge of any plagiarism committed by work under his supervision. HEC funds and oversees higher education in Pakistan.

“This sends the wrong message to the academic community and undermines the credibility of the HEC,” Farukh Iqbal, who brought the charges, told Retraction Watch.

The case seemed simple enough at first. But it has since spiraled into a saga that may reveal as much about the value of political muscle in Pakistan as it does about academic dishonesty.

Ob-gyn loses PhD after committee finds he made up research

It was déjà vu last month when a university in Belgium stripped Egyptian physician Hatem Abu Hashim of his doctorate after he was found to have fabricated data in his thesis.

Just weeks earlier, another Egyptian doctor, Ahmed Badawy, lost the PhD degree he had earned at a Dutch university in 2008. Abu Hashim and Badawy are both professors in the department of obstetrics and gynecology at Mansoura University in Egypt.

According to an investigation by the Vrije Universeit Brussel (VUB), which awarded Abu Hashim his PhD in 2013, the researcher was in “serious violation of scientific integrity” based on “overwhelming evidence of fabrication of statistical outcomes” and “clear lack of statistical proficiency.”

Chemist who cooked data claims PhD years after it was revoked

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.

Harvard surgeon has five papers pulled following internal investigation

Citing an investigation by Harvard Medical School and Brigham and Women’s Hospital, two journals last week retracted five articles by Edward Whang, an associate professor of surgery at the school.

The journals, Oncogene and Surgery, both refer to problems with images of Western blots that could not be resolved because “no underlying research data” were available, according to the investigation.

Questions have loomed over Whang’s research for a decade, and more than 20 of his studies have been flagged on PubPeer for possible image problems. As one commenter wrote in 2014 about one of the now-retracted papers, “It is perhaps fortunate that figure assembly and liver surgery require such unrelated skill sets.”

It is not clear how many of Whang’s papers were affected by the investigation. We reached out to Harvard Medical School for more details, but it declined to share information about the investigation.

Five years on, convicted transplant surgeon earns expressions of concern from Lancet

In 2018, when The Lancet pulled two studies by once-celebrated transplant surgeon Paolo Macchiarini after he was found guilty of misconduct, we suggested in a post that the journal’s chapter of the long-running Macchiarini saga was finally over.

We were wrong.

Last week, the journal issued expressions of concern about a pair of papers by the Italian doctor, who is currently on probation after a court in Sweden convicted him of causing bodily harm to a patient.

‘I was fired up’: Psychiatrist effort prompts retraction of antidepressant treatment paper

Eric Ross was listening to a popular psychiatry podcast one day last spring when “some pretty remarkable” research findings caught his attention.

A team of researchers in Egypt had shown that adding a cheap diabetes drug—metformin—to antidepressant therapy nearly doubled the treatment’s efficacy in people with moderate to severe depression. That meant the drug worked better than electric shock therapy, an option when antidepressants fail. It was a breakthrough.

“I thought, you know, wow, this is something that I’m comfortable prescribing that could make a huge difference for my patients,” said Ross, who at the time was doing his residency in psychiatry at Massachusetts General Hospital.

But when he looked up the study, he discovered several oddities. For instance, the number of patients who experienced an adverse event differed by exactly one for 17 out of 18 single events like fatigue or bloating. That seemed unlikely to have occurred by chance. And all of the scores of statistical tests the authors had done turned out just the way they would have wanted, a dream that rarely comes true in biomedical sciences.

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: