Search Results for: mega-correction

Anil Potti posts restored to Retraction Watch following false DMCA claim

As expected, ten Retraction Watch posts about Anil Potti that were mistakenly removed for a false Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) takedown notice have been restored. Automattic, which runs WordPress, notified us tonight of the move, which comes two weeks after the original notice. The claim against Retraction Watch was ridiculous, of course; a site … Continue reading Anil Potti posts restored to Retraction Watch following false DMCA claim

WordPress removes Anil Potti posts from Retraction Watch in error after false DMCA copyright claim

If you went looking for ten of our posts about Anil Potti today, you would have seen error messages instead. That’s because someone claiming to be from a news site in India alleged we violated their copyright with those ten posts about the former Duke University cancer researcher who has had 19 papers retracted, corrected, … Continue reading WordPress removes Anil Potti posts from Retraction Watch in error after false DMCA copyright claim

Journal of Neuroscience retraction, typically opaque, from author with history of errors

The Journal of Neuroscience has retracted a 2011 paper by an international group of scientists, including the prominent Maryland researcher Ronald Dubner, but readers won’t know why. As the notice “explains“:

Image correction in Current Biology for Harvard’s Sam Lee

The work of Sam W. Lee, a cancer biologist at Harvard and Massachusetts General Hospital, has come under fire at Science Fraud lately over concerns about the possible reuse of images in his group’s published studies. Turns out there’s some there, there after all. The journal Current Biology has issued a pretty thorny correction for … Continue reading Image correction in Current Biology for Harvard’s Sam Lee

A pair of expressions of concern in PLOS ONE over vet science papers

PLoS ONE has issued two Expressions of Concern on unrelated studies, each of which offers plenty to be concerned about — and not just about the research itself. One is a casualty of our old friend,  Jesús Lemus, the Spanish veterinary scientist accused of fabricating his data. The article, titled “The PHA-Skin Test Reflects Acquired … Continue reading A pair of expressions of concern in PLOS ONE over vet science papers

“Major errors” lead to retraction of Nature Photonics paper on quantum dots

Maybe it’s an occupational hazard of dealing with quantum physics — uncertainty and all that — but a group of Swiss researchers has retracted their paper on quantum dots after discovering “major errors” that undermined their conclusions. The article, published in 2010 as a research letter in Nature Photonics, was titled “Polarization-entangled photons produced with … Continue reading “Major errors” lead to retraction of Nature Photonics paper on quantum dots

Correction for MD Anderson’s Bharat Aggarwal arches eyebrows for the right reasons

We’ve written about mega-corrections that allow scientists to retrace virtually all of their steps yet preserve their publications as supposedly legitimate. And we’ve seen plenty of corrections that allow authors to assert that their conclusions are correct when evidently important pieces of data are themselves unreliable. Now comes a correction that seems to us to … Continue reading Correction for MD Anderson’s Bharat Aggarwal arches eyebrows for the right reasons

Authors retract two Cell Metabolism papers after “data were inappropriately removed from the laboratory”

A group of researchers at the University of Utah has retracted two papers from Cell Metabolism after they realized that a dismissed employee had tossed out data that were the basis of some error-laden figures. Here’s the notice for both papers:

It’s all bad, it’s all good: JCI retracts for made-up data but authors stand behind work

The Journal of Clinical Investigation has retracted a 2010 article after the researchers acknowledged that the paper contained a substantial amount of manipulated or manufactured data. How much bad data? Enough to sink seven figures. And the authors said they could not produce raw data in another 19 or so figures and four tables. But, … Continue reading It’s all bad, it’s all good: JCI retracts for made-up data but authors stand behind work

The Anil Potti retraction record so far

A 60 Minutes segment Sunday on Anil Potti has drawn national attention to the case, so we thought this would be a good time to compile all of the retractions and corrections in one place. Duke has said that about a third of Potti’s 40-some-odd papers would be retracted, and another third would have “a … Continue reading The Anil Potti retraction record so far