“… scientists looking for cures to diseases have been building on ideas that aren’t even true.”
A few years ago, scientists at the Thousand Oaks biotech firm Amgen set out to double-check the results of 53 landmark papers in their fields of cancer research and blood biology.
he idea was to make sure that research on which Amgen was spending millions of development dollars still held up. They figured that a few of the studies would fail the test — that the original results couldn’t be reproduced because the findings were especially novel or described fresh therapeutic approaches.
But what they found was startling: Of the 53 landmark papers, only six could be proved valid.
h/t north of 60
“And the Mikey Mann award for ethics, integrity and honesty in Science research goes to . . . ”
Papers are published to obtain grants and not for honesty. Lack of concrete findings does not garner further grants
D Krupski has it right.
Scientists and researchers need to create “new” and “ground breaking” results, to be published and receive grants and government funding. There are a lot of researchers out there, but not a lot of “new.” So, if they squint real hard at the data, they suddenly create a “new” result; whether it exists or not.
I am surprised that it is as high as 25% or 11% (6/53). In research you’d better get the wanted results if you want to keep your job. I would have put the absolute bullshit papers at much closer to 100% (including the deliberately faked ones).
So, what did everyone think a decade ago when the Editor in Chief of the New England Journal of Medicine, Marcia Angel, quit in disgust and published her book “The Truth About the Drug Companies, and What To Do About It”?
Medical publishing has been a whore’s bazaar since the 60s at the least and if you give due weight to the Flexner Report, circa 1910, probably for the past century.
At least the bankers are only stealing your money…the drug firms have been killing your loved ones for profit. Somehow people who frequent this site think “Climate Science” is an “outlier”, a statistical anomaly. It is just carrying on the “tradition” of academic/scientific publishing. Climate science extant is not the exception, it is the long established rule.
These scamming research grant whores and their slimy professor patrons
should be given 10 year sentences at hard labour building remote prisons.
They would do the same for us if ever given the chance, and we would get to
shape stone just for being public “deniers” of their precious malarkey.
“Facts do not exist. Facts are created”
Thats what Steven Donziger said in a video documenting the fraudulent actions of some environmental lawyers fabricating a case against Texaco Ecuador now Chevron. The youtube title is “Fraud: In Their Own Words”