Rakesh Kumar, a researcher with six recent corrections and one retraction, has had one of those corrections upgraded to a retraction. Here’s the unhelpful notice, from Molecular Endocrinology:
A researcher at Tufts University has retracted a paper in Cell, a year after retracting a study on a similar subject from the Journal of Biological Chemistry. Here’s the notice for “SIRT1 Suppresses β-Amyloid Production by Activating the α-Secretase Gene ADAM10,” a 2010 paper by Tufts’ Gizem Donmez, MIT’s Leonard Guarante — of longevity research … Continue reading Cell retraction of Alzheimer’s study is second for Tufts neuroscientist
The suicide earlier this week of Yoshiki Sasai, one of the scientists who worked on the now-discredited STAP stem cell work, was a startling and sobering reminder to the research community and the public that misconduct can take a heavy human toll – even on people like Sasai, whom by all accounts only had the … Continue reading On vigorous scientific debates, witch hunts, and the tragedy of suicide
Another busy week at Retraction Watch. Here’s what was happening elsewhere: “Why are dope-addicted, disgraced doctors running our drug trials?” asks Peter Aldhous. Could a biology student in Colombia be jailed for violating copyright?
Another busy week at Retraction Watch, with a lot of media attention to a story about 60 retractions at a single journal for peer review fraud, and our op-ed in yesterday’s New York Times. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:
Benjamin Barré, a genetics researcher who recently set up his own group at the University of Angers, is retracting four papers he worked on as a graduate student and postdoc. Neil Perkins, in whose lab Barré was a postdoc, and Olivier Coqueret, in whose lab he did his PhD, tell Retraction Watch:
The Kyodo News service has reported that Haruko Obokata has agreed to retract one of the two Nature papers on an easy method of making stem cells. According to the report:
In August 2012, the authors of “Novel Approach to the Lundurine Alkaloids: Synthesis of the Tetracyclic Core,” a paper in Organic Letters, retracted it: The authors retract this Organic Letters communication on the basis that the RCM of 24 to give 25 (Scheme 6) is not reproducible; thus, the reduction of 25 to give 26 … Continue reading Scientist found to have falsified data in thesis sues to keep her PhD
As Retraction Watch readers will likely recall, Paul Brookes ran Science-Fraud.org anonymously until early 2013, when he was outed and faced legal threats that forced him to shut down the site. There are a lot of lessons to be drawn from the experience, some of which Brookes discussed with Science last month. Today, PeerJ published Brookes’ … Continue reading Does publicly questioning papers lead to more corrections and retractions?
Another busy week at Retraction Watch, which we kicked off by asking for your support. Have you contributed yet? Here’s what was happening elsewhere on the web: