Archive for the ‘Ethics’ Category

Plagiarism and the morphing of a Minister

February 18, 2011

Misconduct in the scientific world takes months if not years to be investigated and sanctions – if any – are light. But for those riding high in the poltical world the consequences can be swift. It seems unlikely that Googleberg can continue as the German Defence Minister for very long.

Just 4 days ago he was

Baron Dr. Karl-Theodor Maria Nikolaus Johann Jacob Philipp Franz Joseph Sylvester Freiherr von und zu Guttenberg, Defence Minister of the Federal Republic of Germany.

Baron Dr. Karl-Theodor Maria Nikolaus Johann Jakob Philipp Franz Joseph Sylvester Freiherr von und zu Guttenberg (focus.de)

Then his plagiarism was revealed by the Süddeutsche Zeitung earlier this week, and his copying of some 24 passages for his PhD thesis has grown to be the copying of at least 78 passages. Even the first two paragraphs of his introduction appear to have been copied from a 1997 article in the center-right dailyFrankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung.

Der Spiegel dubbed him Merkel’s Minister of Scandals.

Deutsche Welle decided that Googleberg was more appropriate than Guttenberg. Two criminal complaints have now been filed against him, claiming infringement of copyrights and lying in the sworn statement that accompanied the thesis. Others are claiming that he can’t be guilty of plagiarism – it must have been the fault of his ghost writer!

In a desperate damage control exercise after being read the riot act by Angela Merkel, Googleberg said on Friday that he would temporarily renounce his doctorate and relinquish his “doctor” title amid allegations that he plagiarized significant sections of his dissertation.

And now Der Spiegel has baptised him Merkel’s Copycat minister.

In the space of just 3 days,

Herr. Dr. Karl Theodor Maria Nikolaus Johann Jacob Philipp Franz Joseph Sylvester Freiherr von und zu Guttenberg, Defence Minister of the Federal Republic of Germany

has morphed to

Herr Theodor Googleberg, Merkel’s copycat minister.

But at least Googleberg has upheld the reputation of German politicians in the misconduct stakes and managed to reduce the lead that was being being taken by Bunga Bunga Berlusconi in Italy and by the “free loading” ministers of the French Republic.

China retracts a national scientific award for plagiarism

February 14, 2011

From Xinhua News:

Li Liansheng: photo China Daily

BEIJING, Feb. 10 (Xinhua) — The recent revocation of a national scientific award due to academic fraud was the first of its kind in China, National Office for Science and Technology Awards told Xinhua Thursday.

China’s Ministry of Science and Technology, on Feb. 1, issued a statement revoking the State Scientific and Technological Progress Award (SSTPA) given to Li Liansheng, former professor of Xi’an Jiaotong University.

According to the statement, the investigation found Li had plagiarized others’ works and fabricated data in his winning project, and his prize will be canceled and money awarded retrieved.

Zhao Baojing, senior officer with the National Office for S&T Award, told Xinhua that it was the first time China had withdrawn a national scientific honor.

Li Liansheng, former professor and doctoral tutor of Xi’an Jiaotong University, received the second-place prize of the SSTPA in 2005 for his research on key technologies for designing and manufacturing scroll compressors.

In 2008, he was accused of plagiarism and providing false data in the winning project by six professors of Xi’an Jiaotong University. An investigation was later carried out.

Xi’an Jiaotong University suspended Li from working at the university and rescinded his employment contract in March, 2010.

AsiaOne.com writes:

News that the ministry is stripping him of his award for scientific and technological progress comes three years after six colleagues first claimed that the energy and power studies expert had plagiarized the work of others.

Wan Gang, the minister of science and technology, had earlier vowed that there would be a “zero tolerance” policy toward research frauds and academic plagiarism amid growing criticism about the country’s academic integrity.

“We will dig up the past of those researchers who fake their works and punish them,” he told China Daily in November 2010.

The country has more than 2.3 million workers in the science and technology field and the number of research papers published on the subject has topped the world.

The intense competition to get work published has led some researchers to exaggerate their achievements, said critics.

“In China, we care whether a paper is published in a magazine more than we care about the paper’s quality and academic influence,” Rao Yi, dean of the School of Life Sciences at Peking University, was quoted as saying in a report in China Youth Daily.

Universities and colleges are ranked according to the number of academic papers their staff can get published and the number of references they get in influential journals

Related:

https://ktwop.wordpress.com/2010/10/13/chinese-science-ministry-vindicates-academic-fraud-journalists/

Very fishy: Dismissed from Cambridge, PhD from Imperial, misconduct at UCL, employed at UEL

February 9, 2011

The latest revelations about the chequered career of Jatinder Ahluwalia being dismissed from Cambridge for falsifying data seems like a film script for Leonardo DiCaprio and another Catch Me If You Can movie.

At Cambridge Dr M.D. Brand, Reader in Cellular Biochemistry was his advisor and in a letter dated November 10, 1997, wrote:

…I am no longer prepared to act as PhD supervisor for Jatinder Ahluwalia, and…recommend that he removed from the Board’s list of graduate students because I believe he has been inventing experimental results.

Brand sent Ahluwalia a copy of his letter, and offered again to let him repeat his experiments with witnesses. Ahluwalia evidently didn’t take advantage of that offer. He lost his studentship funding from the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council at the end of 1997, and was dismissed from the graduate studies program
on February 18, 1998.

While the actions at Cambridge and UCL seem to restore some faith in academic integrity some questions arise about his stint at Imperial College where he received his PhD and at the University of East London where he is currently employed as Senior Lecturer & Programme leader in Pharmacology but is writing papers about plagiarism.

He writes on the UEL site:

I undertook my PhD training at Imperial College, Chelsea & Westminster Hospital and Novartis London, studying the mechanisms by which cannabinoid (CB1) and vanilloid (VR1) receptors regulate nociceptive transmission at pre-synaptic nerve terminals.

I was based in Novartis (London) throughout my doctoral studies.

The question arises as to whether Imperial College were aware of his shenanigans at Cambridge. His apparent employment or  funding by Novartis during his PhD also raises questions about whether Novartis were aware of his dismissal from Cambridge and even about his discoveries for (or sponsored by) Novartis:

During my first year, we discovered that CB1 and VR1 receptors are expressed on pre-synaptic nerve terminals (Ahluwalia et al. Neuroscience 100, 685-688, 2000; Ahluwalia et al. Neuroscience 110, 747-753, 2002). The final year of my PhD was spent investigating the effect of the endocannabinoid anandamide on pre-synaptic neurotransmitter release from cultured dorsal root ganglion neurons  (Ahluwalia et al. Journal of Neurochemistry, 84, 585-591, 2003; Ahluwalia et al. EJN, 17, 1-8, 2003).

His paper on plagiarism while at UEL also has some obvious commercial implications.

Imperial College, UEL and Novartis ought to be worried and perhaps so also should be the editors of Neuroscience and the Journal of Neurochemistry.


Not a very sporting day today

February 5, 2011

Former Pakistan captain Salman Butt was banned for 10 years, and fast bowling pair Mohammad Asif for seven years and Mohammad Aamer for five years on Saturday after being found guilty of corruption. The head of the International Cricket Council tribunal Michael Beloff announced the verdict after a lengthy nine-hour hearing in the Qatari capital.

 

Text messages of sumo wrestlers provided by police indicate that one purpose of the suspected match-fixing in the ancient sport was to keep struggling wrestlers in the juryo division. The juryo division is the second of the top two divisions for established sekitori wrestlers, who receive generous monthly pay and are allowed to wear ornate kesho-mawashi sashes at ceremonies and specially formed top notches that set them apart from junior wrestlers.

The text messages showed a rampant and intricate trading of favors, such as diving, among juryo wrestlers desperate to remain in this elite group. Favors could be returned, and traded, from tournament to tournament.

 

Paid news: The cancer in the Indian media

February 5, 2011

The Hindu stands out as one of the few main-stream media prepared to discuss the insidious and increasing trend towards “paid news” in Indian newspapers and on the multiplicity of Indian TV channels fighting for advertising revenue. The TV “news” channels abandoned the rigour of traditional journalism some time ago and are mainly in the business of manufacturing or sensationalising news or of presenting “paid news”. TV anchors are chosen on their ability to rant and programmes are dominated by

  • instant “breaking” news – much of it manufactured – or
  • revelations of scams filmed by “secret” cameras – but usually provoked, or
  • so-called chat shows and panel discussions where  only antagonistic participation is permitted (and the more one can screech over the other the more likely it is to be re-invited to participate – paid of course).

The Hindu writes:

In newspapers and TV channels, choking with stories on corruption, this is the one story you are the least likely to see. The media are their own worst censors when it comes to reporting on ‘Paid News.’

Just before the 2009 Assembly elections in Maharashtra, a large newspaper group in the State brought its editors together for a meeting in Pune. Generally, it was agreed, winning a seat in the State legislature would cost Rs. 3 crore to Rs. 5 crore. ($700,000 to $1.1 million). ….. If there’s that kind of money being spent, said the cash-box boys, we should get a decent share of it. What, after all, is election expenditure but campaign and propaganda expenses? Detailed plans for ‘pay-to-print’ were soon under way in one of the biggest media groups in the State. ……

Paid news comes in many packages: pre-paid, post-paid and yet-to-be-paid, for instance. There are also deluxe tariffs and aam aadmi tariffs, the former in crores (10s of millions), the latter in lakhs (100,000’s). Sadly, these media groups met, even exceeded, their targets.

But it’s not just during elections that paid news or its Euclidian variants occur. The crazy saturation coverage of Davos in some channels was not caused by breathless public interest or media curiosity. It had a lot to do with ‘partnerships’ and corporate subsidies the public can’t see, and won’t be allowed to see. Some channels sent out ‘rules’ to their journalists of things that just had to be done. Rules with no particular journalistic rationale at all. …..

It is a scam worth more millions than anyone can accurately estimate. Most other institutions of Indian democracy and regulatory structures have tried doing something about it. But in the free media, there was a costly silence…..

So the ECI, Parliament, SEBI and top political leaders have all contributed to the fight against the slaughter of honest journalism. Even the spineless PCI did so, before deserting ship. But in the media there is near-total silence. True, there are the exceptions. And the fact that all those journalists went public at those meetings shows how deep their resentment runs. But institutionally, the media’s failure is huge and, if not reversed, will extract a terrible price. The corporate media have censored the Paid News story, browbeaten their own journalists and cheated the public of information it has every right and need to know.

Read the entire article.

Related: India’s Election Commission To Address It’s Paid News Problem

Paid news syndrome is a full blown cancer in Indian Media

Sylvia Bulfone-Paus misconduct story stretches back to at least 1999

February 3, 2011

I have posted earlier about 12 retractions of papers concerning research done under the supervision of Sylvia Bulfone-Paus, a Director at the Research Center Borstel in Germany. Six of the retracted papers had been identified earlier and the next six are reported in Retraction Watch.

The retractions came after an investigation which confirmed the misconduct but put the blame squarely on two Russian researchers Dr. E. Bulanova and Dr. V. Budagian with comments that Bulfone-Paus bore responsibility as their supervisor but that she herself  had not committed any misconduct. The blogger / whistle blower represented by the Marco Berns / Martin Frost persona had commented that the singling out of Bulanova and Budagian was suspicious and hinted darkly at much earlier wrong-doings (and in fact had specifically mentioned the year 1999).

The latest 6 retracted papers  listed include one from 1999 giving some credence to the Martin Frost allegations:

Bulfone-Paus, S., Bulanova, E., Pohl, T, Budagian, V., Dürkop, H., Rückert, R., Kunzendorf, U., Paus, R., and Krause, H. Death deflected: IL-15 inhibits TNF-α-mediated apoptosis in fibroblasts  by TRAF2 recruitment to the IL-15Rα chain. FASEB J. 13:1575-1585 (1999, cited 118 times)

For this paper Bulfone-Paus was both first author and corresponding author. It would seem that any misconduct here cannot be passed off onto authors nos. 2 and 4.

After the investigation Martin Frost  wrote:

It was confirmed that the Institute Directors have been “snooping” on their workforce.  They have indeed viewed the log files of e-mails of the workers.  This deeply distressing news was compounded when it was revealed that the only person who the management arraigned after the Stasi-like “snooping” exercise was a member of der Betriebsrat (workers council) showing that the confidence essential for the worker – Betriebsrat relationship is now severely compromised.

The two other Directors are now discussing what to do next with Bulfone-Paus.

But as Retraction Watch describes, some damage control is being done by the institute with some assistance from the Editor of the EMBO Journal who includes the following sentence in his retraction notice:

The authors declare that key experiments presented in the majority of these figures were recently reproduced and that the results confirmed the experimental data and the conclusions drawn from them.

Why would the Journal publish a line so blatantly intended to white-wash some of the authors? Or does the editor mean that the retraction of the paper is somehow negated!

On this theme of the behaviour of Journals Martin Frost also wrote:

We have been sent the exchange of e-mails below from Dr. Karin Wiebauer.  They describe Dr. Wiebauer’s efforts to rid the scientific literature of the contamination of the mainpulated Bulfone-Paus papers. ….. One interpretation of the exchange is that the Editor-in-chief of the Journal of Immunology is stonewalling and attempting to bury the scientific miscconduct.

The sad saga goes on….


Surprise! Lockerbie bomber release orchestrated by Tony Blair’s gov’t in exchange for trade deals

February 1, 2011
Tony Blair

Tony Blair: Image via Wikipedia

Apparently Tony Blair and his government were more than mere US poodles. That Blair was an accomplished liar regarding his “sexed up” Iraq dossiers has become apparent. But that he had (has) little sense of ethics and could treat with the Devil for the sake of trade deals has always been suspected but is coming out clearly now.

British ministers secretly advised Libya on securing the successful early release of the Lockerbie bomber and demonstrate that Tony Blair’s Government was “playing false” over the issue.

If corruption is taken to be “having or showing a willingness to act dishonestly in return for money” it is not difficult to attach a label to Tony Blair and his government.

The Telegraph:

A Foreign Office minister sent Libyan officials detailed legal advice on how to use Abdelbaset al-Megrahi’s cancer diagnosis to ensure he was released from a Scottish prison on compassionate grounds, documents obtained by the Daily Telegraph show.

The Duke of York is also said to have played a behind-the-scenes role in encouraging the terrorist’s release.

The Scottish First Minister said the revelations confirm that while his administration acted according to its public pronouncements on the affair, Tony Blair’s Government was behaving duplicitously.

“The cables … show that the former UK Government were playing false on the issue, with a different public position from their private one,” said a statement released by Mr Salmond’s office.

Downing Street maintained at the time that is was not complicit in the release of al-Megrahi, and that the decision to free the convicted terrorist was taken by the Scottish Executive alone.

The Libyans closely followed the advice which led to the controversial release of Megrahi – who was convicted of the murder of 270 passengers on Pan Am Flight 103 – within months of the Foreign Office’s secret intervention.

According to American officials, Mr Blair was suspected of securing trade deals after agreeing to include Megrahi in the agreement.

After Megrahi was released in August 2009, another American document records Colonel Muammar Gaddafi’s comments – which suggest that Prince Andrew, the UK’s trade envoy, may have played a role. The document records: “He [Gaddafi] went on to thank his ‘friend Brown’, the British Prime Minister, his government, Queen Elizabeth, and Prince Andrew, who ‘against all odds encouraged this brave decision’. [Gaddafi] noted that the UK efforts would positively affect ‘exchange’ between the two countries.

Read more.


Carrefour and Walmart branded as cheats in China

January 31, 2011

Xinhua reports that Carrefour and Walmart have damaged their own reputations by trying to cheat Chinese consumers by overpricing. With the New Year to be celebrated on 3rd February, they are being seen as trying to exploit the traditional Chinese generosity during the festival holiday:

Carrefour and Walmart swindle Chinese consumers

Over the crowds of holiday shoppers in China’s big stores this Spring Festival lingers an atmosphere of suspicion. With charges of price deception hanging over the big chains of Carrefour and Wal-Mart and local authorities moving to levy fines, many Chinese — normally averse to be pinching pennies during the Lunar New Year — are checking their receipts at the tills.

The New Year, which falls on Feb. 3 this year, is normally a time of largesse and excess — all the more reason why many shoppers feel so betrayed. Customers can be seen recording label prices in notebooks or calculating their final bill on their mobile phones as they walk the aisles. At outlets of Carrefour and Wal-Mart in cities such as Beijing, Shanghai and Chengdu, the check out queues have grown as customers doublecheck prices at the tills.

“I would never have imagined global firms would do this intentionally and I have to be cautious,” said a woman surnamed Wang, after shopping at a foreign-owned supermarket in Chengdu, southwest China’s Sichuan Province.

From KamCity:

Carrefour and Walmart have issued public statements of apology to their customers in China, after local regulators found that several of their outlets were overcharging customers. The National Development and Reform Commission had found several instances of overpricing at 11 Carrefour and three Walmart outlets, on products including tea, underwear, and household products.

Carrefour said it “sincerely apologises” for the errors, and offered to refund customers five times the difference between the price charged and that on the label. Meanwhile, Walmart also expressed its “sincere apology” to those affected, adding that it has “launched self-examinations” and “will strengthen its price monitoring.”

The NDRC ordered local authorities to fine the individual outlets and confiscate their “illegal income”, with fines amounting to five times the amount confiscated, or up to 500,000 yuan if the amount cannot be calculated.

In the Chinese government’s battle against inflation, the Western retailers are building up a reputation for being a significant part of the problem.


European commission extends carbon market freeze indefinitely

January 27, 2011

And about time too.

A raft of countries (including Japan, Australia, Canada and the United States) have already shelved cap and trade schemes.

Of course the fundamental fraud that is carbon trading goes much deeper than just the  recent thefts of credits. Hopefully it will never be revived!

image wattsupwiththat.com

The Guardian:

The European commission’s emergency suspension last week of trading in carbon allowances to put a halt to rampant theft of credits by hackers has been extended indefinitely until countries can prove their systems are protected from further fraud.

While the suspension had been expected to end last night, Brussels now says that the freeze in trades had been imposed to give the commission executive some breathing space to figure out what to do.

“The suspension last week was only a transitional measure to give the commission and member states the time to assess the situation and decide the way forward,” the commission’s climate spokeswoman, Maria Kokkonen, said. “Okay, this hurts, but it must hurt in order to make things more secure, more robust. Evolution through crisis.”

A total of 30 countries that participate in the Emissions Trading Scheme, Europe’s flagship climate change policy, must now send assessments of the situation performed by independent monitors. On 19 January, the commission suspended “spot” trading in allowances after up to 2m permits worth around €30m were stolen by computer hackers. Brussels said that half the participating countries were not sufficiently secure. Permits went missing in Austria, the Czech Republic and Greece.

The strange and murky case of Silvia Bulfone-Paus: 12 retractions so far …..

January 25, 2011

Twelve papers where Sylvia Bulfone-Paus was the senior author have been retracted.

Silvia Bulfone-Paus: image retraction watch

That itself is sufficiently unusual and remarkable. But the story seems to go back a long way. Retraction Watch has been following the story.

In September 2010 Nature carried the story of a formal investigation which had started in July 2010 of scientific misconduct being carried out at the Research Center Borstel in Germany (Forschungszentrum Borstel, Leibniz Gemeinschaft, Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, Medizinischen Fakultäten der Universitäten Lübeck und Kiel). The story however was not about the investigation but about a destabilising influence:

But events around such an investigation in Germany have taken a troubling and damaging turn from such good practice in the past few months. An unknown agitator using the presumed pseudonym Marco Berns is engaged in an e-mail and Internet offensive against two biomedical researchers whom he accuses of scientific fraud.

Berns’s libellous messages are targeted at dermatologist Ralf Paus and immunologist Silvia Bulfone-Paus, a married couple who both hold joint positions at the University of Manchester, UK, and the University of Lübeck, Germany.

The trial-by-Internet is disturbing a formal investigation, organized by the Research Center Borstel in Germany and begun in July, into some of the pair’s publications.

“Marco Berns” and his accomplice (or alter ego?) “Martin Frost” were posting articles on the internet since at least the end of 2009 and had also been subjected to “cease and desist” demands from lawyers representing the Research Centre. Some of these articles questioned Sylvia Bulfone-Pause’s use of academic titles among other wrong doings.

It does seem that the formal investigation started in July 2010 partly – if not wholly – because of the allegations which had been made by Berns and Frost in 2009. Formally the reason for the investigation was that Bulfone-Pause herself had reported some manipulation of data in papers published about research carried out under her supervision but how and when such manipulation had been discovered is not very clear.

In any case the investigation was completed and the results were published by the Research Centre on 2nd December 2010.

The Commission concludes that scientific misconduct (has ocurred) within the laboratory group “Immunobiology” for years. In 6 out of 8 of the analyzed publications in which, the two former research assistants, Dr. E. Bulanova and Dr. V. Budagian, recorded as first authors, manipulation of images found that the manipulation of the reproduction of scientific results. Data corruption within the meaning of “independent inventors” of results are not available. Given the primary responsibility of the first authors in data collection and data presentation in a scientific publication, these two first authors of these publications (bear the) main responsibility for scientific misconduct.

The blame was put squarely on Drs. Bulanova and Budagian – both Russian – and as their supervisor, Bulfone-Paus received a firm slap on the wrist:

The 6  publications complained of (were) produced under the senior authorship of Prof. Dr. Bulfone-Paus………  The Commission considers that this a lack of supervision which must be expected from the senior author / group leader, even if the first author of the offending publications are experienced scientists. The senior author / research group leader, therefore, carries a key responsibility for the scientific wrongdoings within their work group.

Nature reported:

An external investigation, launched in July and chaired by Werner Seeger, a biomedical researcher at the University of Giessen, Germany, found that two former postdocs with the centre’s immunology group were guilty of using pictures of protein blots from unrelated experiments to support their findings on signalling in cells involved in allergic reactions such as asthma. The pair’s supervisor, Silvia Bulfone-Paus, who chairs the centre’s immunology and cell biology department, bears “substantial responsibility” for the manipulations, the committee found, but added that they found no evidence of data fabrication.

The three Directors of the Research Centre are Prof. Dr. Dr. S. Bulfone-Paus, Prof. Dr. U. Schaible and Prof. Dr. P. Zabe. And the elusive Martin Frost continued his writings implying that the Russian scientists could actually just be scapegoats for the more senior authors involved and that some of their wrongdoing could be traced back to 1999!!

Now the six retractions have grown to be 12 papers so far.

This story is not over yet……..