Turns out much of what we “understand” about Alzheimer’s Disease is total BS. Given that s many of us deal with the issue every day, this is an abomination of academic scientific research.
Masliah appeared an ideal selection. The physician and neuropathologist conducted research at the University of California San Diego (UCSD) for decades, and his drive, curiosity, and productivity propelled him into the top ranks of scholars on Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s disease. His roughly 800 research papers, many on how those conditions damage synapses, the junctions between neurons, have made him one of the most cited scientists in his field. His work on topics including alpha-synuclein—a protein linked to both diseases—continues to influence basic and clinical science.
But over the past 2 years questions have arisen about some of Masliah’s research. A Scienceinvestigation has now found that scores of his lab studies at UCSD and NIA are riddled with apparently falsified Western blots—images used to show the presence of proteins—and micrographs of brain tissue. Numerous images seem to have been inappropriately reused within and across papers, sometimes published years apart in different journals, describing divergent experimental conditions. Science
Wow, over 100 NIH funded Alzheimers papers are completely fake
— Carnivore Aurelius ©🥩 ☀️🦙 (@AlpacaAurelius) October 13, 2024
The researcher basically copy and pasted and made up scatter plots
He was considered a top 10 researcher before this and his papers were the backbone for our current understanding of Alzheimers
This is our science pic.twitter.com/bubu6CltK5
What other scientific fields might be riddled with fraud?
Virology and Vaccinology: The spotlight on these areas has intensified skepticism due to how research findings are applied in public health policies. Controversies over virus origins or vaccine safety and efficacy can lead to questions about the underlying research integrity.
Nutrition: Constantly shifting dietary advice often stems from studies funded by industries with vested interests, casting doubt on the impartiality and accuracy of nutritional science.
Cardiology: High stakes in pharmaceutical research for heart health can sometimes lead to data manipulation or selective reporting, impacting trust in research outcomes.
General Scientific Trust: The essence of your concern touches on a broader issue of trust in scientific institutions. When foundational trust is shaken by fraud in one field, it can ripple across others, leading people to question all established scientific knowledge.
While widespread fraud isn’t universally confirmed across these fields, the existence of fraudulent practices in some high-profile areas does breed skepticism towards scientific authority, urging a critical approach to how we consume and trust scientific findings.
Do you still trust your doctor, or specialist? Or do you have a nagging doubt that your medication is prescribed because the doctor’s office profits from the number of prescriptions it writes?