Researchers expose organised scientific fraud network
Researchers from Northwestern University found that the publication of fraudulent scientific work is now outpacing the growth of legitimate research.
This network involves 'paper mills', brokers, and compromised journals that sell authorship slots and publish low-quality manuscripts with fabricated data, manipulated or stolen images, and plagiarised content.
The study found academics use various strategies, including colluding to publish papers, paying for authorship, and utilising 'sham peer-review' processes to get fraudulent work accepted.
The study calls for enhanced scrutiny, improved detection methods, and a radical restructuring of scientific incentives to combat this fraud, also highlighting the potential future threat from generative AI.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
20 minutes ago
- The Independent
Trump moves to shut down NASA missions that measure carbon dioxide and plant health
The Trump administration is moving to shut down two NASA missions that monitor a potent greenhouse gas and plant health, potentially shutting off an important source of data for scientists, policymakers and farmers. President Donald Trump 's budget request for fiscal year 2026 includes no money for the Orbiting Carbon Observatories, which can precisely show where carbon dioxide is being emitted and absorbed and how well crops are growing. NASA said in an emailed statement Wednesday that the missions were 'beyond their prime mission' and being terminated 'to align with the President's agenda and budget priorities.' But the missions — a free-flying satellite launched in 2014 and an instrument attached to the International Space Station in 2019 that include technology used in the Hubble Space Telescope — still are more sensitive and accurate than any other systems in the world, operating or planned, and a 'national asset' that should be saved, said David Crisp, a retired NASA scientist who led their development. They helped scientists discover, for example, that the Amazon rain forest emits more carbon dioxide than it absorbs, while boreal forests in Canada, Russia and places where permafrost is melting absorb more than they emit, Crisp said. They also can detect the 'glow' of photosynthesis in plants, which helps monitor drought and predict food shortages that can lead to civil unrest and famine, he said. 'This is really critical,' Crisp said. 'We're learning so much about this rapidly changing planet.' The decision to end the missions is 'extremely shortsighted,' said Jonathan Overpeck, a climate scientist at the University of Michigan. 'The observations provided by these satellites ... (are) critical for managing growing climate change impacts around the planet, including in the U.S.," he said. Looking to Congress Crisp and others hope Congress will vote to preserve funding for the missions, which are funded through the fiscal year that ends Sept. 30. A bill in the House closely aligns with the president's request and would eliminate the missions, while a Senate version preserves them. But with Congress in recess, it is unclear whether a budget will be adopted before the new fiscal year begins Oct. 1. If it doesn't, Congress could adopt a resolution to continue current funding until a budget is passed, though some lawmakers fear the Trump administration could try to delay or withhold that money. Congressional Democrats warned acting NASA Administrator Sean Duffy last month that it would be illegal to terminate missions or impound funds already appropriated by Congress. Experts said the administration's move to eliminate funding aligns with other actions to cut or bury climate science. 'The principle seems to be that if we stop measuring climate change it will just disappear from the American consciousness,' said University of Pennsylvania climate scientist Michael Mann. Backup plan Crisp and others also are trying to put together a coalition of outside partners — including from Japan and Europe — that could fund and operate the instrument attached to the space station. NASA said it will accept outside proposals through Aug. 29. The free-flying satellite, though, is at risk of being brought down, meaning it would burn up in the atmosphere. National Public Radio first reported that NASA employees were making plans to end the missions. Crisp said advocates are hoping NASA also allows outside control of that satellite, which covers more of the globe, but there are legal hurdles to overcome because it would mean giving control of a U.S. satellite to a group that could include foreign partners. 'We're going out to billionaires. We're going out to foundations,' Crisp said. 'But ... it's a really, really bad idea to try and push it off onto private industry or private individuals or private donors. It just doesn't make sense.' ___ The Associated Press' climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Warnings issued in California over wild pigs found with blue meat
Californian authorities have issued warnings after wild pigs with 'bright blue' flesh were reported again, indicating they have been poisoned. The California Department of Fish and Wildlife received reports of this bizarre occurrence in March, confirming the phenomenon is a sign of poisoning. The blue coloration is attributed to exposure to the anticoagulant rodenticide Diphacinone, a poison that prevents blood from clotting. Wild pigs can ingest the poison by eating bait, which often contains dye, or by consuming other animals that have ingested the substance. Hunters are advised that game meat, including wild pig, may be contaminated, with previous incidents and studies confirming rodenticide residue in wild animals.
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
FACT FOCUS: RFK Jr.'s reasons for cutting mRNA vaccine not supported by evidence
Although mRNA vaccines saved millions of lives during the COVID-19 pandemic, U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. incorrectly argued they are ineffective to justify the Department of Health and Human Service's recent decision to cancel $500 million in government-funded research projects to develop new vaccines using the technology. The longtime vaccine critic said in an X video posted Tuesday evening that mRNA vaccines do not adequately prevent upper respiratory infections such as COVID-19 and the flu, advocating instead for the development vaccines that use other processes. COVID-19 is the only virus for which real-world data on mRNA vaccine effectiveness is currently available, as mRNA vaccines for other diseases, including the flu, are still under development. The two scientists whose discoveries enabled the creation of mRNA vaccines against COVID-19 won a Nobel Prize in 2023 for their work. Kennedy's claim ignores how mRNA vaccines work, according to experts. They prevent against severe infection and death, but cannot completely prevent an infection from occurring in the first place. Plus, years of research supports the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines that use mRNA technology. Here's a closer look at the facts. KENNEDY: 'As the pandemic showed us, mRNA vaccines don't perform well against viruses that infect the upper respiratory tract.' THE FACTS: His claim is contradicted by scientific evidence. Countless studies show that vaccinated individuals fare far better against COVID-19 infections than those who are unvaccinated, while others have estimated that COVID-19 vaccines prevented millions of deaths during the global pandemic. The mRNA vaccines do not prevent respiratory diseases entirely, experts say. Rather, they can prevent more serious illness that leads to complications and death. For example, an mRNA vaccine against COVID-19 may prevent an infection in the upper respiratory tract that feels like a bad cold from spreading to the lower respiratory tract, where it could affect one's ability to breathe. 'A vaccine cannot block a respiratory infection,' said Dr. Jake Scott, an infectious diseases physician and clinical associate professor at Stanford University School of Medicine. 'That's never been the standard for a respiratory virus vaccine. And it's never been the expectation, and it's never been that realistic.' He called Kennedy's claim 'misguided.' Jeff Coller, a professor of RNA biology and therapeutics at Johns Hopkins University, had a similar outlook. ' Vaccinations don't have to be neutralizing, meaning that you're not going to get COVID,' he said. 'But the important part of a vaccination is that they reduce hospitalization and death. And a reduction in hospitalization and death is proof of an effective vaccine.' Vaccines have traditionally required growing viruses or pieces of viruses called proteins and then purifying them. Then a small dose of the vaccine is injected to train the body how to recognize when a real infection hits so it's ready to fight back. But this method takes a long time. The mRNA technology speeds up the process and allows existing vaccines to be updated more quickly. The 'm' in mRNA stands for messenger because the vaccine carries instructions for our bodies to make proteins. Scientists figured out how to harness that natural process for vaccines by making mRNA in a lab. They take a snippet of the genetic code that carries instructions for making the protein they want the vaccine to target. Injecting that snippet instructs the body to become its own mini-vaccine factory, making enough copies of the protein for the immune system to recognize and react. Scott explained that mRNA vaccines are not a 'magic force field' that the immune system can use to block an infection, as it can't detect whether a virus is nearby. It can only respond to a virus that has already entered the body. In the case of COVID-19, this means that the virus could cause an upper respiratory tract infection — a cold, essentially — but would be significantly less likely to cause more severe consequences elsewhere. Myriad studies on the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines have been published since they first became available in late 2020. Although protection does wane over time, they provide the strongest barrier against severe infection and death. For example, a 2024 study by the World Health Organization found COVID-19 vaccines reduced deaths in the WHO's European region by at least 57%, saving more than 1.4 million lives since their introduction in December 2020. A 2022 study published in the journal Lancet Infectious Diseases found that nearly 20 million lives were saved by COVID-19 vaccines during their first year. Researchers used data from 185 countries to estimate that vaccines prevented 4.2 million COVID-19 deaths in India, 1.9 million in the United States, 1 million in Brazil, 631,000 in France and 507,000 in the United Kingdom. The main finding — that 19.8 million COVID-19 deaths were prevented — is based on estimates of how many more deaths than usual occurred during the time period. Using only reported COVID-19 deaths, the same model yielded 14.4 million deaths averted by vaccines. Another 2022 study, published in The New England Journal of Medicine, reported that two mRNA vaccines were more than 90% effective against COVID-19. Operation Warp Speed, the federal effort to facilitate the development and distribution of a COVID-19 vaccine, began under the first Trump administration. 'What I don't understand is why is President Trump is allowing RFK Jr. to undermine his legacy that led to a medical intervention that literally saved millions of lives?' Coller said. 'Why is Trump allowing RFK to undermine U.S. leadership in biomedical research and drug development?' ___
