Cancer and Peer Review Scandal

Science has for too long hidden behind the idea of "peer review," where it is supposed to be a check and balance to conclusions asserted from research.

The problem of course is research money, corporate profits, narcissism and private agendas, whereby results can be cooked by scientists, and in fact are much more frequently than the average person knows.

Take the case of the recent revelation by the Office of Research Integrity (ORI) at the U.S. Department of Health, whereby it was revealed he had "engaged in research misconduct by fabricating data that were included in two published papers" related to cancer research.

Fabrications include:

Oncogene February 2009, which found that HIC1, a protein thought to suppress tumor growth, is a 'central molecule in a novel mechanism controlling cell growth and that the disruption of this HIC1-mediated pathway may lead to abnormal cell proliferation and, ultimately, cancer.'

Molecular Endocrinology December 2009, which found 'reintroducing HIC1 into resistant breast cancer cells restored their sensitivity to the estrogen antagonists, indicating the existence of a novel regulatory mechanism for growth control of breast cancer cells.'

The Wall Street Journal reported on peer reviews:

"Just 22 retraction notices appeared in 2001, but 139 in 2006 and 339 last year. Through seven months of this year, there have been 210, according to Thomson Reuters Web of Science, an index of 11,600 peer-reviewed journals world-wide …

At the Mayo Clinic, a decade of cancer research, partly taxpayer-funded, went down the drain when the prestigious Minnesota institution concluded that intriguing data about harnessing the immune system to fight cancer had been fabricated. Seventeen scholarly papers published in nine research journals had to be retracted. A researcher, who protests his innocence, was fired. In another major flameout, 18 research journals have said they are planning to retract a total of 89 published studies by a German anesthesiologist …"

So-called peer reviewed scientific conclusions can no longer be considered legitimate, as the fraud and consequences inherent in the system, including the obvious conflict of interests, make it completely unreliable across about every "scientific" discipline their is out there.

For the falsified cancer results above it's particularly damning, as other publications have cited the material and doctors have made decisions for their patients based upon it.

This lying snake needs to be prosecute and sued into oblivion, as well as Boston University which allowed the fraud to go forward, suggesting incompetence or collusion.

The money involved in research is enormous, giving incentive for peer reviews to be based upon outright lies.