Skip to main content

Fraud: Journals must act now

linkurl:Today?s science fraud revelation;https://www.the-scientist.com/news/display/22952/ is that a study published in __The Lancet__, purportedly demonstrating that common painkillers could protect against oral cancer, was pure fiction. The response of __The Lancet__ Editor Richard Horton, linkurl:as quoted by the BBC;https://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4617372.stm "The peer-review process is good at picking up poorly designed studies, but it is not designed to pick up fabricated research

Written byRichard Gallagher
| 1 min read

Register for free to listen to this article
Listen with Speechify
0:00
1:00
linkurl:Today?s science fraud revelation;https://www.the-scientist.com/news/display/22952/ is that a study published in __The Lancet__, purportedly demonstrating that common painkillers could protect against oral cancer, was pure fiction. The response of __The Lancet__ Editor Richard Horton, linkurl:as quoted by the BBC;https://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4617372.stm "The peer-review process is good at picking up poorly designed studies, but it is not designed to pick up fabricated research. Just as in society you cannot always prevent crime, in science you cannot always prevent fabrication." Hmmm. According to The Norwegian daily newspaper __Dagbladet__, 250 of the 908 people in Sudbo's study shared the same birthday. If journals can?t pick that kind of thing up, either by internal review or peer review, doubts about science's self-policing systems are well-founded. Horton mirrors the fatalism of Donald Kennedy, Editor of __Science__, in the wake of the Hwang debacle: "The public needs to understand that the journals and peer review are not perfect," he said. That?s first entry in understatement of the year. But what is he doing about it? The modest but worthwhile proposal from __Science__ is that authors will need to state their specific contributions. It?s nowhere near enough. Journals need to take a lead in combating fraud, yet Editors are distancing themselves from the issue. linkurl:An exception is __Journal of Cell Biology__;https://www.jcb.org/cgi/content/full/166/1/11 , which screens accepted manuscripts for evidence of image manipulation, in collaboration with a mathematician who is a specialist in art fraud. Why aren?t other journals doing this? And why isn?t the dragnet being widened to include a search of data for the telltale signatures of counterfeiting? That's what is needed. Right now, I?d settle for an acknowledgement from Editors that (a) there?s a problem, (b) they are going to do something about it.
Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of

The Scientist Logo
Receive full access to more than 35 years of archives, as well as TS Digest, digital editions of The Scientist, feature stories, and much more!
Already a member?
Add The Scientist as a preferred source on Google

Add The Scientist as a preferred Google source to see more of our trusted coverage.

Meet the Author

Related articles background image
August 2026 Digest cover
August 2026

Epic Fail: Sea-Monkeys Sabotage Fieldwork

When Barry Hicks set out to photograph thrombolites, thousands of unexpected visitors photobombed his underwater images.

View this Issue
Improving rAAV Production for Viral Vector Manufacturing

Improving rAAV Production for Viral Vector Manufacturing

cytiva logo
Advancing Respiratory Immunity Through Tissue-Resident Memory T Cell Research

Advancing Respiratory Immunity Through Tissue-Resident Memory T Cell Research

Miltenyi
Scientist holding a clear 384-well PCR microplate in a laboratory

What Dictates PCR Success Before Amplification Begins?

Integra Logo
Overcoming Immunotherapy Resistance in Liver Cancer

Overcoming Immunotherapy Resistance in Liver Cancer

Axion Biosystems

Products

Sino Biological Logo

Sino Biological Launches European Newsletter Campaign with Exclusive Welcome Gifts

Sino Biological Logo

Sino Biological Launches SuperNuclease ® Pro with Free Trial Program

Sino Biological Logo

Sino Biological Launches Precisely Characterized Full-Length p-Tau217 Protein to Advance Next-Generation Alzheimer’s Biomarker Assay Development

A photo of a scientist placing the Resipher device on a 96-well plate.

Resipher: Continuous Live-Cell Mitochondrial Respiration Monitoring in 96-Well Plates

Lucid Scientific logo