“Crack Down on Scientific Fraudsters” — our op-ed in today’s New York Times

nytlogo379x64As Retraction Watch readers know, it’s very rare for a scientist to face criminal charges for fraud, and it’s also very rare for the National Institutes of Health to recoup grants found to have involved misconduct. Both have happened in the case of Dong-Pyou Han, the former Iowa State University researcher who spiked rabbit blood samples with human antibodies to make it look as if an HIV vaccine was working.

We used that case as the basis of an op-ed that appears in today’s New York Times, arguing that it’s time to “crack down on scientific fraudsters.” Have a look.

Speaking of the Times, we’re also on page A3 of the paper version, in a story titled “Science Journal Pulls 60 Papers in Peer-Review Fraud,” which picked up the SAGE scandal we broke the other day. A number of other outlets have also followed up on that story, with many of them kind enough to cite and quote us. Here are several: Continue reading “Crack Down on Scientific Fraudsters” — our op-ed in today’s New York Times

University where researcher faked HIV vaccine findings won’t receive last $1.4 million of grant

iowa stateThere has been another development in the case of Dong-Pyou Han, the former Iowa State University (ISU) researcher who admitted last fall to spiking rabbit blood samples to make it look as though his team’s HIV vaccine was working in the animals.

The Des Moines Register reports: Continue reading University where researcher faked HIV vaccine findings won’t receive last $1.4 million of grant

Weekend reads: Fallout from STAP stem cell retractions, confessed HIV vaccine fraudster pleads not guilty

booksAnother busy week at Retraction Watch, with developments in two closely watched cases at Nature and PNAS. Here’s what was happening around the web: Continue reading Weekend reads: Fallout from STAP stem cell retractions, confessed HIV vaccine fraudster pleads not guilty

Retractions arrive in plagiarism scandal involving economist Nijkamp

nijkampRetractions have arrived in the case of Peter Nijkamp, a leading Dutch economist accused of duplication and plagiarism. The Review of Economic Analysis has removed two of Nijkamp’s articles for self-plagiarism.

According to the NRC Handelsblad website (courtesy of Google translate):

The affair university economics professor Peter Nijkamp and his PhD student Karima Kourtit has escalated. The editors of the journal Review of Economic Analysis (RoEA) appears to have withdrawn because of self-plagiarism two scientific articles (reuse your own work earlier without acknowledgment), NRC Handelsblad discovered last week at the RoEA website.

The website reports that “significant parts” of the reclusive articles have appeared in other publications Nijkamp and Nijkamp / Kourtit, without reference orderlyearlier. It involves work Nijkamp alone and work of VU economist Frank Bruinsma with Nijkamp and Kourtit.

Continue reading Retractions arrive in plagiarism scandal involving economist Nijkamp

STAP stem cell papers officially retracted as Nature argues peer review couldn’t have detected fatal problems

nature 714A significant chapter of the nearly six-month saga of the STAP stem cell controversy has come to an end, with Nature running retraction notices for the two papers involved. The journal has also published an editorial about the case that’s worth a read.

The retractions for “Bidirectional developmental potential in reprogrammed cells with acquired pluripotency” and “Stimulus-triggered fate conversion of somatic cells into pluripotency” both read: Continue reading STAP stem cell papers officially retracted as Nature argues peer review couldn’t have detected fatal problems

Weekend reads: Academics go to court, hijacked journals

booksAnother busy week at Retraction Watch, with Ivan in Seoul speaking on research integrity at the Korean Medical Association conference. Here’s what was happening elsewhere: Continue reading Weekend reads: Academics go to court, hijacked journals

Chemistry paper in Science earns expression of concern for unreliable data

science 62714A 2011 paper in Science has been subjected to an expression of concern and has led to an investigation by the Texas university where the work was done.

Here’s the expression of concern, signed by Science editor in chief Marcia McNutt (and paywalled): Continue reading Chemistry paper in Science earns expression of concern for unreliable data

Republished Seralini GMO-rat study was not peer-reviewed, says editor

env sci europeIn our coverage Tuesday of the republication of the controversial retracted study of GMOs and rats by Gilles Seralini and colleagues, we wrote this about a strange passage in an editor’s note on the paper:

The republished study was peer-reviewed, according to the press materials, and Seralini confirmed that it was in an email to Retraction Watch. But we were curious what “any kind of appraisal of the paper’s content should not be connoted” meant. We asked Seralini and the editor of Environmental Sciences Europe, Henner Hollert, but neither responded.

Hollert has responded to the same question from Nature, which reports: Continue reading Republished Seralini GMO-rat study was not peer-reviewed, says editor

Cancer researcher facing criminal inquiry up to six retractions

jbc 620Alfredo Fusco, who is under criminal investigation in Italy for scientific fraud, has had two more papers retracted.

Both are in the Journal of Biological Chemistry (JBC). Here are the two studies: Continue reading Cancer researcher facing criminal inquiry up to six retractions

Physicists with retraction for a “pattern that was unphysical” lose another for manipulation

journal of applied physicsIn September, we wrote about the retraction of a physics paper for “a pattern that was unphysical.”

The team, whose first author, R.K. Singhal refused to sign the notice, has had another paper retracted, this one in the Journal of Applied Physics. Here’s the notice for “Study of electronic structure and magnetization correlations in hydrogenated and vacuum annealed Ni doped ZnO:” Continue reading Physicists with retraction for a “pattern that was unphysical” lose another for manipulation