Dipak Das, the UConn red wine researcher charged by his institution with rampant misconduct that will likely lead to dozens of retractions, is evidently a 99%-er — when it comes to accuracy, that is. According to a statement purportedly from his lawyer refuting those charges, Das claims, among other things, that the output from his … Continue reading Resveratrol researcher Dipak Das: My lab’s work was “99% correct”
In the wake of the massive allegations of fraud by resveratrol researcher Dipak Das, other researchers in the field are clearly trying to distance themselves from the University of Connecticut scientist. Nir Barzilai told us yesterday, for example, that despite Das seemingly’ impressive publication record, “Rome was not built on Dr. Das.” Harvard’s David Sinclair went … Continue reading So how peripheral was Dipak Das’ resveratrol work, really?
Many Retraction Watch readers will now be familiar with the case of Dipak Das, the resveratrol researcher about whom the University of Connecticut issued a voluminous report yesterday — summary here — detailing 145 counts of data fabrication and falsification. This has been a fast-moving story, so we wanted to highlight a number of updates to our original post, and offer a few … Continue reading Resveratrol fraud case update: Dipak Das loses editor’s chair, lawyer issues statement refuting all charges
The University of Connecticut, in what clearly seems like an attempt to get ahead of damaging news, has announced an “extensive” investigation into research misconduct involving one of its scientists, Dipak K. Das. According to a press release, the university has notified 11 journals that published Das’ work about the alleged fraud. One area of … Continue reading UConn resveratrol researcher Dipak Das fingered in sweeping misconduct case
Sometimes things get pretty meta around here. Exhibit A: The journal Current Medical Chemistry has retracted a 2012 paper for plagiarizing from a 2011 article — and the senior authors of each article share the same last name. Ho hum, you say. But that name is one that might be familiar to RW readers. Here’s … Continue reading In which a researcher named Das plagiarizes from another researcher named Das, one with 20 retractions
Dipak Das, who until earlier this year ran a high-profile cardiovascular research center at the University of Connecticut, has recorded a slick looking video defense against allegations that he cooked data and manipulated images in scores of published studies, 12 of which have been retracted to date. Das, who was hit with a 60,000 pages … Continue reading Resveratrol researcher Das in video: Yes, I manipulated images, but only because the journals asked me to
Broccoli almost certainly is good for you — but just how good might have taken a bit of a hit with the retraction of a 12-year-old review on the vegetable’s health benefits by a notorious fraudster. By our count, the retraction, which appeared in July, marks the 22nd for Das, formerly of the University of … Continue reading Retraction of review of broccoli’s health benefits is 22nd for deceased author, 5th for one of his postdocs
A liver physiologist at the University of Connecticut with millions of dollars in Federal U.S. funding included false data in half a dozen grant applications, according to the U.S. Office of Research Integrity. Li Wang, according to the ORI,
A group of smoking researchers — no, not scientists who are on fire; scientists who study the effects of tobacco smoke — has retracted a 2009 article after deciding that they were no longer “satisfied with the quality of the data.” The paper, “Cigarette Smoke–induced Oxidative/Nitrosative Stress Impairs VEGF- and Fluid Shear Stress–Mediated Signaling in Endothelial … Continue reading Scientists retract paper because they’re “not satisfied with the quality of some of the data”
We’ve learned a lot about retractions in 2012, from the fact that most retractions are due to misconduct to the effects they can have on funding. We’ve seen eyebrow-raising reasons for retractions, from a hack of Elsevier’s peer review system to a researcher peer reviewing his own papers, to massive fraud in psychology to a … Continue reading How many retractions were there in 2012? And, some shattered records