The Fake Research Epidemic
Trust the Science?
As The End of Covid approaches it seems fitting to post this little gem (originally published by ScienceDaily back on Nov. 17, 2010).
Lest anyone think the issue outlined below has been resolved, it most assuredly has not.
Editors of leading journals have publicly estimated that as much as HALF of what gets published as “science” in the medical realm may be fraudulent.
Keep that in mind when you see the next ad campaign for some jab or other needless pharma intervention (or perhaps the fake pandemic used to push them)…
US Scientists Significantly More Likely to Publish Fake Research, Study Finds
Originally published by ScienceDaily (Nov. 17, 2010)
US scientists are significantly more likely to publish fake research than scientists from elsewhere, finds a trawl of officially withdrawn (retracted) studies, published online in the Journal of Medical Ethics.
Fraudsters are also more likely to be "repeat offenders," the study shows.
The study author searched the PubMed database for every scientific research paper that had been withdrawn—and therefore officially expunged from the public record—between 2000 and 2010.
A total of 788 papers had been retracted during this period. Around three quarters of these papers had been withdrawn because of a serious error (545); the rest of the retractions were attributed to fraud (data fabrication or falsification).
The highest number of retracted papers were written by US first authors (260), accounting for a third of the total. One in three of these was attributed to fraud.
The UK, India, Japan, and China each had more than 40 papers withdrawn during the decade. Asian nations, including South Korea, accounted for 30% of retractions. Of these, one in four was attributed to fraud.
The fakes were more likely to appear in leading publications with a high "impact factor." This is a measure of how often research is cited in other peer reviewed journals.
More than half (53%) of the faked research papers had been written by a first author who was a "repeat offender." This was the case in only one in five (18%) of the erroneous papers.
The average number of authors on all retracted papers was three, but some had 10 or more. Faked research papers were significantly more likely to have multiple authors.
Each first author who was a repeat fraudster had an average of six co-authors, each of whom had had another three retractions.
"The duplicity of some authors is cause for concern," comments the author. Retraction is the strongest sanction that can be applied to published research, but currently, "[it] is a very blunt instrument used for offences both gravely serious and trivial."
⚠️ TEOC is an EXCELLENT resource in moving past Germ Theory, virus superstition, and the incorrect beliefs inherent in allopathy in general.
THE END OF COVID summit is the event to end them all—participants include myself, David Icke, Tom Cowan, Christiane Northrup, Eileen McKusick and many more.
➡ Make sure you reserve your spot—and if you already did use a previous link of mine from a couple months back, try registering with this one instead, as I may have shared the wrong link initially.
I’ll be giving 3 presentations (one on how illness ACTUALLY spreads, one on the massive sham of peer review in medicine, and an interview with Alec talking about convid-19 from a psychosomatic angle—trust me, you don’t want to miss that as it has much more relevance beyond just convid).
About Me/Brendan:
Host of Truthiverse podcast. Author of the epic, “The Grand Illusion: A Synthesis of Science and Spirituality — Book 1.” (Book 2 is nearly finished!) Founder of The Truthiversity 📽
As affordable as it is, if your budget’s too tight for the whole enchilada inside The Truthiversity, feel free to donate a lesser subscription ⬇️ to support my work here - thanks in advance! :-)
OR, if you appreciate this article you could just buy me a coffee as a one-off! ☕️
Great stuff, Brendan, thanks. It is literally impossible to ascertain in which institutional realm more charlatans, frauds, and quacks abound, organized religion or science.
I sincerely appreciate you taking your time and energy to find this information and inform us. Many of us had our suspicions but it helps when others can confirm those with the data.
It is getting more difficult to find accurate information, plus the search engines are fixed to show us the sanitized and approved “information” first, and a chronic lack of opposing or alternative information.