Nerve regeneration paper retracted over faked data

[Farooqji]

Following “reports from the scientific community” Xin-Peng Dun, who was then a senior research fellow at the Peninsula Medical School at the University of Plymouth in the United Kingdom, “admitted, orally and in writing, to the fabrication of data, unknown to the authors, and is solely responsible for this fabrication,” according to the retraction notice.

spectrumnews.org/news/nerve...

[crewmanwhite]

There have been statements in the past from editors of very prestigious medical journals that up to half the research published is faulty, fabricated or false in some way.

It does reduce confidence in the integrity of our medical research community and the results published.

[Baron1 in reply to crewmanwhite]

The reason they do it is because of the following:

1. They want to show the companies or organizations that they work for that their work has meaning.

2. They want to show that their work is creditable in advancing their beliefs.

3. They need to keep their board of directors interested in future funding of their other studies they may want to do in the future.

They are most of the time only interested in notoriety among their peers.

It becomes disheartening when these people create disillusions with their fabrications of results.

[crewmanwhite in reply to Baron1]

Very true. Profit and power!