Weekend reads: Medical device maker demands a retraction; an admission from a predatory publisher; a journal digs in and won’t retract

Before we present this week’s Weekend Reads, a question: Do you enjoy our weekly roundup? If so, we could really use your help. Would you consider a tax-deductible donation to support Weekend Reads, and our daily work? Thanks in advance. The week at Retraction Watch featured the story of two scientific sleuths who were right — … Continue reading Weekend reads: Medical device maker demands a retraction; an admission from a predatory publisher; a journal digs in and won’t retract

Nobel Prize winners correct the literature, too

If you’re ever cringing at the thought of having to correct a paper, here’s a story that may help you work through that pain. Paul Nurse shared the Nobel Prize in Medicine or Physiology in 2001. While holding posts at Oxford University, the Rockefeller Institute and elsewhere, and now as director of the Francis Crick … Continue reading Nobel Prize winners correct the literature, too

Nature cancer paper that raised animal welfare concerns is retracted

When Nature published a paper in 2011 describing a compound extracted from a pepper plant that appeared to kill cancer cells but leave healthy cells unscathed, it got some attention. Of course, the news caught the media’s eye, but also that of other researchers, who have since jumped on the concept, and continued to study … Continue reading Nature cancer paper that raised animal welfare concerns is retracted

“[T]he data and findings…are unreliable:” Authors explain how a refutation came to be published in the same journal as the original

A group of tiny, all-female animals called bdelloid rotifers has long fascinated scientists. Among other questions, of course, is: Why haven’t they gone extinct, if they can’t mix up their genes? In 2016, a group of authors published a paper in Current Biology claiming to show that rotifers could swap DNA the way bacteria do. … Continue reading “[T]he data and findings…are unreliable:” Authors explain how a refutation came to be published in the same journal as the original

Weekend reads: “Chronic compulsive writing syndrome;” a new way to respond to rejection; rewards for a center that doesn’t yet exist

Before we present this week’s Weekend Reads, a question: Do you enjoy our weekly roundup? If so, we could really use your help. Would you consider a tax-deductible donation to support Weekend Reads, and our daily work? Thanks in advance. The week at Retraction Watch featured, unfortunately, a likely DDOS attack that kept our site dark … Continue reading Weekend reads: “Chronic compulsive writing syndrome;” a new way to respond to rejection; rewards for a center that doesn’t yet exist

Study claiming “abortion reversal” is safe and effective temporarily withdrawn for ethical issues

A journal has temporarily removed a study by a researcher who has long championed a highly controversial “abortion reversal” method over concerns about its ethical approval. The study, “A Case Series Detailing the Successful Reversal of the Effects of Mifepristone Using Progesterone,” appeared in Issues In Law And Medicine in April. Its first author, George … Continue reading Study claiming “abortion reversal” is safe and effective temporarily withdrawn for ethical issues

UK House of Commons committee wants to make sure “university investigations into research misconduct are handled appropriately”

As Retraction Watch readers may recall, the UK’s House of Commons Science and Technology Committee has been holding an inquiry into scientific misconduct for well over a year. During that inquiry, we submitted written evidence including some statistics about how the UK’s retraction rate compared to other countries, and our Ivan Oransky gave oral testimony … Continue reading UK House of Commons committee wants to make sure “university investigations into research misconduct are handled appropriately”

Weekend reads: “Ethics dumping;” getting scientists to admit mistakes; the problem with conference dinner chatter

Before we present this week’s Weekend Reads, a question: Do you enjoy our weekly roundup? If so, we could really use your help. Would you consider a tax-deductible donation to support Weekend Reads, and our daily work? Thanks in advance. The week at Retraction Watch featured a collection of reports of scientific misconduct investigations, the story … Continue reading Weekend reads: “Ethics dumping;” getting scientists to admit mistakes; the problem with conference dinner chatter

Reports of misconduct investigations can tell us a lot. Here are more than a dozen of them.

Fakery. Ignored whistleblowers. Sabotage. Subterfuge. Reading reports of institutional investigations into allegations of misconduct can sometimes feel like reading a spy novel about science. And we’ve read a lot of them. In a recent post that drew from one such report, we wrote: Whenever we learn about misconduct cases at public universities, we file such … Continue reading Reports of misconduct investigations can tell us a lot. Here are more than a dozen of them.

35,000 papers may need to be retracted for image doctoring, says new paper

Yes, you read that headline right. In a new preprint posted to bioRxiv, image sleuths scanned hundreds of papers published over a seven-year period in Molecular and Cellular Biology (MCB), published by the American Society for Microbiology (ASM). The researchers — Arturo Casadevall of Johns Hopkins University, Elisabeth Bik of uBiome, Ferric Fang of the … Continue reading 35,000 papers may need to be retracted for image doctoring, says new paper