a*h
2 楼
The sad and sobering tale of how allegedly fabricated results of research
led by a Johns Hopkins University lab led to the suicide of a scientist in
Taiwan,and the dismissal of the man who blew the whistle, are the focus of a
feature in yesterday's Washington Post.
The story is the tale of Daniel Yuan, formerly a genetics researcher in Jeff
Boeke's lab at Hopkins. For years, Yuan suggested that data being generated
in the lab's studies of gene interactions in yeast were suspicious.
Yuan was dismissed from Hopkins in 2011, and last summer one of the members
of the research team, Yu-yi Lin, was found dead in his new lab in Taiwan of
an apparent suicide.
Lin was an author of a paper published in Nature last year that now,
according to the Washington Post, may soon be corrected by the journal. At
age 38, Lin left behind a wife and three daughters.
The article suggests that Yuan was fired because of his concerns that the
data that was used to write the Nature paper and others did not support the
conclusions reported. Yuan also reached out to the editors at Nature,
warning the journal of the weakness of the data behind the paper, saying
that its results were overstated and that some of the analyses outlined in
the paper may not have been conducted at all.
After Lin was found dead, Yuan received an e-mail "essentially blaming him
for driving Lin to suicide," the Post reports.
The Post feature also suggests that the saga of Yuan and Lin are part of a
larger trend of falsified research and unfounded research conclusions being
published because of the immense pressure caused by an increasing number of
scientists who are racing to win grants in an environment of diminishing
funding.
original article:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/doubts-about-joh
led by a Johns Hopkins University lab led to the suicide of a scientist in
Taiwan,and the dismissal of the man who blew the whistle, are the focus of a
feature in yesterday's Washington Post.
The story is the tale of Daniel Yuan, formerly a genetics researcher in Jeff
Boeke's lab at Hopkins. For years, Yuan suggested that data being generated
in the lab's studies of gene interactions in yeast were suspicious.
Yuan was dismissed from Hopkins in 2011, and last summer one of the members
of the research team, Yu-yi Lin, was found dead in his new lab in Taiwan of
an apparent suicide.
Lin was an author of a paper published in Nature last year that now,
according to the Washington Post, may soon be corrected by the journal. At
age 38, Lin left behind a wife and three daughters.
The article suggests that Yuan was fired because of his concerns that the
data that was used to write the Nature paper and others did not support the
conclusions reported. Yuan also reached out to the editors at Nature,
warning the journal of the weakness of the data behind the paper, saying
that its results were overstated and that some of the analyses outlined in
the paper may not have been conducted at all.
After Lin was found dead, Yuan received an e-mail "essentially blaming him
for driving Lin to suicide," the Post reports.
The Post feature also suggests that the saga of Yuan and Lin are part of a
larger trend of falsified research and unfounded research conclusions being
published because of the immense pressure caused by an increasing number of
scientists who are racing to win grants in an environment of diminishing
funding.
original article:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/doubts-about-joh
i*t
3 楼
2年之后再回来看吧。
【在 j***a 的大作中提到】
: RT
【在 j***a 的大作中提到】
: RT
a*y
4 楼
emmm
a
Jeff
generated
members
of
【在 a********h 的大作中提到】
: The sad and sobering tale of how allegedly fabricated results of research
: led by a Johns Hopkins University lab led to the suicide of a scientist in
: Taiwan,and the dismissal of the man who blew the whistle, are the focus of a
: feature in yesterday's Washington Post.
: The story is the tale of Daniel Yuan, formerly a genetics researcher in Jeff
: Boeke's lab at Hopkins. For years, Yuan suggested that data being generated
: in the lab's studies of gene interactions in yeast were suspicious.
: Yuan was dismissed from Hopkins in 2011, and last summer one of the members
: of the research team, Yu-yi Lin, was found dead in his new lab in Taiwan of
: an apparent suicide.
a
Jeff
generated
members
of
【在 a********h 的大作中提到】
: The sad and sobering tale of how allegedly fabricated results of research
: led by a Johns Hopkins University lab led to the suicide of a scientist in
: Taiwan,and the dismissal of the man who blew the whistle, are the focus of a
: feature in yesterday's Washington Post.
: The story is the tale of Daniel Yuan, formerly a genetics researcher in Jeff
: Boeke's lab at Hopkins. For years, Yuan suggested that data being generated
: in the lab's studies of gene interactions in yeast were suspicious.
: Yuan was dismissed from Hopkins in 2011, and last summer one of the members
: of the research team, Yu-yi Lin, was found dead in his new lab in Taiwan of
: an apparent suicide.
B*b
5 楼
我是2011年3月的,都准备两年以后再来
【在 j***a 的大作中提到】
: RT
【在 j***a 的大作中提到】
: RT
w*s
6 楼
Yuan is simply attacking the first fig of Lin et al Nature paper. And the
paper is really focused on AMPK and its acetylation regulation.
Yuan and Washington Post also admitted "he is questioning the first part.
and even if the first part is wrong, the second part of the paper can still
be right".
Lin should simply leave the genomics and statistics out of this paper.
What a pity.
paper is really focused on AMPK and its acetylation regulation.
Yuan and Washington Post also admitted "he is questioning the first part.
and even if the first part is wrong, the second part of the paper can still
be right".
Lin should simply leave the genomics and statistics out of this paper.
What a pity.
s*l
7 楼
那你还在这里发帖
【在 B**********b 的大作中提到】
: 我是2011年3月的,都准备两年以后再来
【在 B**********b 的大作中提到】
: 我是2011年3月的,都准备两年以后再来
h*u
8 楼
still
Leaving this paper aside, hypothetically if an author "knowingly" put some
shaky data in one part of the paper, as a reader, do you trust the paper as
a whole?
【在 w**********s 的大作中提到】
: Yuan is simply attacking the first fig of Lin et al Nature paper. And the
: paper is really focused on AMPK and its acetylation regulation.
: Yuan and Washington Post also admitted "he is questioning the first part.
: and even if the first part is wrong, the second part of the paper can still
: be right".
: Lin should simply leave the genomics and statistics out of this paper.
: What a pity.
f*7
9 楼
It seems that Yuan is questioning the analysis and interpretation of data -
that's quite different from somebody forging data intentionally. It's not
uncommon that statisticians will analyze the same data differently. This
report only tells Yuan's side of the story.
With that said, it does smell bad that the Boeke group cannot produce a
rebuttal
in a timely manner.
as
【在 h****u 的大作中提到】
:
: still
: Leaving this paper aside, hypothetically if an author "knowingly" put some
: shaky data in one part of the paper, as a reader, do you trust the paper as
: a whole?
that's quite different from somebody forging data intentionally. It's not
uncommon that statisticians will analyze the same data differently. This
report only tells Yuan's side of the story.
With that said, it does smell bad that the Boeke group cannot produce a
rebuttal
in a timely manner.
as
【在 h****u 的大作中提到】
:
: still
: Leaving this paper aside, hypothetically if an author "knowingly" put some
: shaky data in one part of the paper, as a reader, do you trust the paper as
: a whole?
a*h
10 楼
The sad and sobering tale of how allegedly fabricated results of research
led by a Johns Hopkins University lab led to the suicide of a scientist in
Taiwan,and the dismissal of the man who blew the whistle, are the focus of a
feature in yesterday's Washington Post.
The story is the tale of Daniel Yuan, formerly a genetics researcher in Jeff
Boeke's lab at Hopkins. For years, Yuan suggested that data being generated
in the lab's studies of gene interactions in yeast were suspicious.
Yuan was dismissed from Hopkins in 2011, and last summer one of the members
of the research team, Yu-yi Lin, was found dead in his new lab in Taiwan of
an apparent suicide.
Lin was an author of a paper published in Nature last year that now,
according to the Washington Post, may soon be corrected by the journal. At
age 38, Lin left behind a wife and three daughters.
The article suggests that Yuan was fired because of his concerns that the
data that was used to write the Nature paper and others did not support the
conclusions reported. Yuan also reached out to the editors at Nature,
warning the journal of the weakness of the data behind the paper, saying
that its results were overstated and that some of the analyses outlined in
the paper may not have been conducted at all.
After Lin was found dead, Yuan received an e-mail "essentially blaming him
for driving Lin to suicide," the Post reports.
The Post feature also suggests that the saga of Yuan and Lin are part of a
larger trend of falsified research and unfounded research conclusions being
published because of the immense pressure caused by an increasing number of
scientists who are racing to win grants in an environment of diminishing
funding.
original article:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/doubts-about-joh
led by a Johns Hopkins University lab led to the suicide of a scientist in
Taiwan,and the dismissal of the man who blew the whistle, are the focus of a
feature in yesterday's Washington Post.
The story is the tale of Daniel Yuan, formerly a genetics researcher in Jeff
Boeke's lab at Hopkins. For years, Yuan suggested that data being generated
in the lab's studies of gene interactions in yeast were suspicious.
Yuan was dismissed from Hopkins in 2011, and last summer one of the members
of the research team, Yu-yi Lin, was found dead in his new lab in Taiwan of
an apparent suicide.
Lin was an author of a paper published in Nature last year that now,
according to the Washington Post, may soon be corrected by the journal. At
age 38, Lin left behind a wife and three daughters.
The article suggests that Yuan was fired because of his concerns that the
data that was used to write the Nature paper and others did not support the
conclusions reported. Yuan also reached out to the editors at Nature,
warning the journal of the weakness of the data behind the paper, saying
that its results were overstated and that some of the analyses outlined in
the paper may not have been conducted at all.
After Lin was found dead, Yuan received an e-mail "essentially blaming him
for driving Lin to suicide," the Post reports.
The Post feature also suggests that the saga of Yuan and Lin are part of a
larger trend of falsified research and unfounded research conclusions being
published because of the immense pressure caused by an increasing number of
scientists who are racing to win grants in an environment of diminishing
funding.
original article:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/doubts-about-joh
a*y
11 楼
emmm
a
Jeff
generated
members
of
【在 a********h 的大作中提到】
: The sad and sobering tale of how allegedly fabricated results of research
: led by a Johns Hopkins University lab led to the suicide of a scientist in
: Taiwan,and the dismissal of the man who blew the whistle, are the focus of a
: feature in yesterday's Washington Post.
: The story is the tale of Daniel Yuan, formerly a genetics researcher in Jeff
: Boeke's lab at Hopkins. For years, Yuan suggested that data being generated
: in the lab's studies of gene interactions in yeast were suspicious.
: Yuan was dismissed from Hopkins in 2011, and last summer one of the members
: of the research team, Yu-yi Lin, was found dead in his new lab in Taiwan of
: an apparent suicide.
a
Jeff
generated
members
of
【在 a********h 的大作中提到】
: The sad and sobering tale of how allegedly fabricated results of research
: led by a Johns Hopkins University lab led to the suicide of a scientist in
: Taiwan,and the dismissal of the man who blew the whistle, are the focus of a
: feature in yesterday's Washington Post.
: The story is the tale of Daniel Yuan, formerly a genetics researcher in Jeff
: Boeke's lab at Hopkins. For years, Yuan suggested that data being generated
: in the lab's studies of gene interactions in yeast were suspicious.
: Yuan was dismissed from Hopkins in 2011, and last summer one of the members
: of the research team, Yu-yi Lin, was found dead in his new lab in Taiwan of
: an apparent suicide.
w*s
12 楼
Yuan is simply attacking the first fig of Lin et al Nature paper. And the
paper is really focused on AMPK and its acetylation regulation.
Yuan and Washington Post also admitted "he is questioning the first part.
and even if the first part is wrong, the second part of the paper can still
be right".
Lin should simply leave the genomics and statistics out of this paper.
What a pity.
paper is really focused on AMPK and its acetylation regulation.
Yuan and Washington Post also admitted "he is questioning the first part.
and even if the first part is wrong, the second part of the paper can still
be right".
Lin should simply leave the genomics and statistics out of this paper.
What a pity.
h*u
13 楼
still
Leaving this paper aside, hypothetically if an author "knowingly" put some
shaky data in one part of the paper, as a reader, do you trust the paper as
a whole?
【在 w**********s 的大作中提到】
: Yuan is simply attacking the first fig of Lin et al Nature paper. And the
: paper is really focused on AMPK and its acetylation regulation.
: Yuan and Washington Post also admitted "he is questioning the first part.
: and even if the first part is wrong, the second part of the paper can still
: be right".
: Lin should simply leave the genomics and statistics out of this paper.
: What a pity.
f*7
14 楼
It seems that Yuan is questioning the analysis and interpretation of data -
that's quite different from somebody forging data intentionally. It's not
uncommon that statisticians will analyze the same data differently. This
report only tells Yuan's side of the story.
With that said, it does smell bad that the Boeke group cannot produce a
rebuttal
in a timely manner.
as
【在 h****u 的大作中提到】
:
: still
: Leaving this paper aside, hypothetically if an author "knowingly" put some
: shaky data in one part of the paper, as a reader, do you trust the paper as
: a whole?
that's quite different from somebody forging data intentionally. It's not
uncommon that statisticians will analyze the same data differently. This
report only tells Yuan's side of the story.
With that said, it does smell bad that the Boeke group cannot produce a
rebuttal
in a timely manner.
as
【在 h****u 的大作中提到】
:
: still
: Leaving this paper aside, hypothetically if an author "knowingly" put some
: shaky data in one part of the paper, as a reader, do you trust the paper as
: a whole?
s*y
16 楼
Matrix 很牛，这么老的帖子都默默的记在你的硬盘上了。呵呵。
【在 l**********1 的大作中提到】
: Up!
: 不是不报, 时候未到; 时候一到,统统报销
: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v482/n7384/full/nature1080
: http://www.bs.jhmi.edu/MBG/boekelab/members/lin.html
: http://www.mitbbs.com/article_t/Biology/31851661.html
【在 l**********1 的大作中提到】
: Up!
: 不是不报, 时候未到; 时候一到,统统报销
: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v482/n7384/full/nature1080
: http://www.bs.jhmi.edu/MBG/boekelab/members/lin.html
: http://www.mitbbs.com/article_t/Biology/31851661.html
l*1
17 楼
Your query reminded me that on a couple of months after above null floor
post,
pls go to your computer HD
check beolow
http://ipv6.weiming.info/zhuti/Biology/31704723/
21st floor noted Nature letter pdf file...:)))
【在 s******y 的大作中提到】
: Matrix 很牛，这么老的帖子都默默的记在你的硬盘上了。呵呵。
post,
pls go to your computer HD
check beolow
http://ipv6.weiming.info/zhuti/Biology/31704723/
21st floor noted Nature letter pdf file...:)))
【在 s******y 的大作中提到】
: Matrix 很牛，这么老的帖子都默默的记在你的硬盘上了。呵呵。
s*y
18 楼
笑死。幸好我当时没有认真的follow 那个文章。
【在 l**********1 的大作中提到】
: Your query reminded me that on a couple of months after above null floor
: post,
: pls go to your computer HD
: check beolow
: http://ipv6.weiming.info/zhuti/Biology/31704723/
: 21st floor noted Nature letter pdf file...:)))
【在 l**********1 的大作中提到】
: Your query reminded me that on a couple of months after above null floor
: post,
: pls go to your computer HD
: check beolow
: http://ipv6.weiming.info/zhuti/Biology/31704723/
: 21st floor noted Nature letter pdf file...:)))
l*1
19 楼
That Boeke recent Cell paper , be careful to it too,please
HTTP ://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/2013/11/06/nature-yanks-controversial-
genetics-paper-whose-co-author-was-found-dead-in-lab-in-2012/#more-16409
HtTp: ://download.cell.com/pdf/PIIS0092867413005308.pdf?intermediate=true
【在 s******y 的大作中提到】
: 笑死。幸好我当时没有认真的follow 那个文章。
HTTP ://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/2013/11/06/nature-yanks-controversial-
genetics-paper-whose-co-author-was-found-dead-in-lab-in-2012/#more-16409
HtTp: ://download.cell.com/pdf/PIIS0092867413005308.pdf?intermediate=true
【在 s******y 的大作中提到】
: 笑死。幸好我当时没有认真的follow 那个文章。
相关阅读
又没有专业人士说一下寒春与是不是假的韩春雨事件—Nature Biotechnology编辑部的最新回复学界楷模帮忙找一下这篇文章的pdf版本，谢谢国内的客座教授位置怎么联系从韩主席的表现可以推断其造假的可能性很高[澎湃]13位科学家实名呼吁对韩春雨启动调查为什么大家恨韩副主席我为韩主席献上一策大家毕业一般要几篇paper？韩春雨结束，估计快轮到仇子龙了！澎湃：韩春雨的基因编辑技术恐遭弃用让河北科大回复其实很简单没人关注illumina股票狂跌25%？为毛这就不能是三体文明在搞鬼呢？肉汤究竟是不是好东西？韩主席最后会以什么名义被处理？其实解决问题的方法很简单SCI论文又被拒了 有偿请求大神修改文章颜宁不错，赞