Articles pulled after data fabrication in Cambridge DNA lab

Retractions in Nature and Science follow Abderrahmane Kaidi’s resignation from Bristol

Published on
April 12, 2019
Last updated
April 15, 2019
Nick Mayo
cambridge-university
Source: Getty
Read more about
Read more about: 
Research ethics

Register to continue

Why register?

  • Registration is free and only takes a moment
  • Once registered, you can read 3 articles a month
  • Sign up for our newsletter
Please
or
to read this article.

Related articles

Related universities

Reader's comments (4)

#1 Submitted by drmikesutton_252472 on April 12, 2019 - 8:31am
Until we admit that science fraud underpins so many "beliefs" held by the scientific establishment it is hypocritical to focus on those lower down the hierarchy. Darwin and Wallace each commit science fraud (arguably the world's greatest) by plagiarism, lies and glory theft. See the Big Data detected, independently verifiable, new evidence that is just too disturbing for the so called scientific "establishment" to face: http://www.nauka-a-religia.uz.zgora.pl/index.php/pl/czasopismo/46-fag-2015/921-fag-2015-art-05
#2 Submitted by thomas.... on April 12, 2019 - 8:52am
Yeah, and the earth is flat... The danger is exactly this, that people start doubting scientific findings in their entirety. This is not about belief - that belongs in the sphere of religion - but about Dr Kaidi making a choice, and that was to forge results instead of truthfully admitting that he had not done the work, or that the results were not as expected. It is easy to blame ‘perverse incentives’ - they are certainly there but it’s unfair to the majority of scientists who face the same challenges and don’t stray from the path. This incident does not prove that science is wrong, but that the controls worked, at least for once. We need to establish a culture more tolerant of ‘negative results’, and value the knowledge that comes from ‘failed’ experiments.
#3 Submitted by drmikesutton_252472 on April 13, 2019 - 8:59am
As I was saying, painful fully confirmable facts - even those in expert peer reviewed journals - attract knee-jerk reaction responses from credulous true believers in debunked science mythology. In this sill comment about flat Earthers we see a typical example of the lower order. Of course, like religious nut jobs they are far too lazy to think and check the independently verifiable facts that debunk their mere comfort-beliefs. Not only are Darwin and Wallace proven plagiarists but - contrary to beliefs amongst the zombie horde in science - Richard Dawkins never coined the term or concept selfish gene. https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/7/4/66
#4 Submitted by JoeFWong on April 12, 2019 - 6:55pm
Such is the game: senior faculty happily adding their name to any paper as “co-author” and take credit but cleared of any wrong-doing when something goes awry. How can you be an “author” but not responsible of any subsequent issues of something you supposedly is an integral part of?

You might also like

Sponsored

Featured jobs

See all jobs
ADVERTISEMENT