7 ms·

This story lacks a lot of context. This linked article provides some of it: https://forbetterscience.com/2020/10/07/gregg-semenza-real-nobel-prize-and-unreal-r

This story lacks a lot of context. This linked article provides some of it: https://forbetterscience.com/2020/10/07/gregg-semenza-real-nobel-prize-and-unreal-research-data/ https://forbetterscience.com/2020/10/07/gregg-semenza-real-n... There's a big range between "grad student loaded the wrong file when making sub-panel 3d" and "explicitly falsified images to support an hypothesis". This article certainly makes it seem like the latter. Science is a human endeavor and there will always be people trying to game the system The good news is, an awful lot of cheaters get caught these days and it's getting riskier all the time.

WhitneyLand 4y ago
Yes, and moreover some of the images were not just swapped out with incorrect images. When you take a look it seems inescapable some images were first copied then edited with a tool to move around sub-pieces like blocks in a puzzle, then presented as a different image along side the original. Literally this seems like some kind of Photoshopping rather than misplacing images. Can’t see how this could be done accidentally. Every endeavor has some grift, but this is extensive malfeasance by high ranking cancer scientists, following shortly after it happened in Alzheimer’s research: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32183302 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32183302
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
kurupt213 4y ago
You don’t retract a paper because the wrong image was included. You issue a correction.
dddddddd111 4y ago