#falsifying data

One paper (Park et al. Nature 613: pp 138) that caught my attention over the post-Christmas period made the proposition that scientific papers are getting less disruptive over time, until now, in the physical sciences, there is essentially very little disruption currently. First, what do I mean by disruption? To me, this is a publication that is at cross-purposes with established thought. Thus…

You may think that science is a noble activity carried out by dedicated souls thinking only of the search for understanding and of improving the lot of society. Wrong! According to an item published in Nature ( https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-02035-2) there is rot in the core. A survey of 64,000 researchers at 22 universities in the Netherlands was carried out, 6,813 actually filled out the…

Submitted by urbancelt

A medical journal article co-authored by SickKids hospital’s top pediatrician was manipulated by a drug company and understated the risks of a powerful antipsychotic used to treat kids with behavioural problems, the former head of the U.S. drug regulator alleges.

The 2003 article concluded there was no correlation between long-term use of Risperdal and an increased risk of certain side-effects, including the growth of breasts in boys.

The listed authors included respected experts in the pediatric field — Toronto’s Dr. Denis Daneman and two U.S. doctors — and three employees from Janssen, which makes Risperdal.

The medical article was singled out in recent U.S. lawsuits against Janssen as an alleged example of drug company influence on doctors and published research. A court exhibit shows a draft of the study describing an association with certain side-effects — a finding that a Janssen employee internally flagged as “significant.” This information is not in the published version of the article.

“My name is on an article in which there is some data that has been left out. That, to me, crosses a line,” Daneman, pediatrician-in-chief at the Hospital for Sick Children, told the Star.

Jackie: Don’t cry, you poor girl. Why are you crying over a stupid experiment?

Kat: It’s not stupid! It’s my first lab, and I’m already going to fail it since we don’t have any data.

Jackie: Chill out. Don’t let a stupid lab make you cry. Here, copy my data. Oh, and make sure you adjust all the data points by a few tenths just so no one will suspect you guys of copying.

Ryan: But how did you get this data? I thought you shattered your glassware too.

Jackie: You ignorant fool! Haven’t you heard of magic before?

Ryan: Magic?

Jackie: You’re so gullible, Ryan. Actually, I copied Sandra’s data and adjusted the data points by a few tenths.

Ryan: Genius! You’re such a genius.

Kat: But doesn’t copying data from others constitute academic misconduct? I don’t want my medical school application tainted by an incident of academic misconduct on my transcript.