Fraud... what to do?

C

cat77

Registered Member
I need some help/advice. Sorry for posting this here... but in some way it's pertinent to the forum, as the field in question is covered by this forum.

I found myself in a situation that's killing me. I overhead and then was told by a friend about a suspicious grad student on his/her lab. This student fabricated and/or faked data (in the best case scenario the data exists and the student made the figures as clean as possible).

Well, I have absolutely nothing to do with this field, the only thing that links me to this person is that I am pursuing my PhD in the same institution. I saw the fake data (and indeed... it's fab, no doubts on this). My fiend told everybody above him/her, and finally the PI got to know. What the PI did?? Hired the student as a post-doc... The student thesis and at least one of the papers is completely made up... (A respected journal with impact factor >8).

I made up a copy from the files (without my friend permission), and also you can tell something is wrong with the paper figures just by copying and pasting on photoshop and making some changes on contrast/brightness.

Now it comes my question. What should I do??? This is killing myself, I know it's wrong, but were should I trace my moral threshold?? Do I have anything to do with it?? My friend asked me to absolutely keep this to myself, although I didn't say I would and he/she knows how all this is upsetting me.

What is my role in all this?? And Gosh, how something like this can happen? And a PI just trust the student like that without at least asking to see the ORIGINALS??? It would be that simple...

I really, really appreciate any sincere comment, please, try to put yourself on my position before commenting it.

Thanks A LOT!
 
cat77 said:
... This student fabricated and/or faked data ...
Click to expand...


Get used to it. It is not an uncommon occurence.

The Friday, Sept. 14 edition of The Wall Street Journal reported:

...Statistically speaking, science suffers from an excess of significance. Overeager researchers often tinker too much with the statistical variables of their analysis to coax any meaningful insight from their data sets. "People are messing around with the data to find anything that seems significant, to show they have found something that is new and unusual," Dr. Ioannidis said ...
Click to expand...


http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB118972683557627104.html

So in other words, what you have experienced is "just another day at the office" in that line of work.
 
Monkey: No, I am not connected to the PI at all.

Nutter: I am aware about it, but copying and pasting bands from several western blots to assemble a single one is a bit of a stretch, isn't it?

Thanks for the input!
 
Exposing him is a lose-lose situation. Nobody profits from it.


The institute will lose face, so they won't be too happy.

The journal will lose face, so they won't be too happy.

The PI will lose face, so he/she won't be too happy.

The PhD student/Post doc is expendable. So it doesn't really matter if he or she isn't too happy.

One option is to collect all the data (as you indicated), keep it, and use it later on for 'networking'. But you already have shown to have a sensitivity for ethics so that is not in line with your character.

Exposing it can seriously backfire of course. YOu are a PhD, so therefore a nobody. The best scapegoat there is. Either you or the other one who is now the postdoc, but the name of the PI will get smeared of course, so you are more vulnerable.

Hmmm...

I can see your problem...

Of course you could let someone external expose it.

That might be a course of action.

Is it really obvious from the paper pictures as you said?

They have indeed caught people before by just adjusting contrast.
 
Yes, at least 3 of the paper figures were manipulated. The most obvious you can see the control has been added and the 1/2 lower part of the gel was smuggled, erasing whatever was there.

The other 2 you can (not so clearly) see perfect squares around the bands.

But I agree, it's a catch 20/20. It only be a benefit for people that are basing somehow their research afford on these "new" findings.

Ahhhh... I wish I didn't know it!
 
Oh... and I do have better quality images from the figures on the paper (powerpoint presentation for international meetings), then you can REALLY see the manipulation.
 
spuriousmonkey said:
Exposing him is a lose-lose situation. Nobody profits from it.
Click to expand...

I agree. But is it only about "profiting"? What about ethics? He knows about the situation ...if he does nothing, doesn't that reflect on his own character and ethics? ..which might come back and bite him on the ass?

If someone is doing something wrong, they should be exposed to the authorities in writing, with substantiating evidence.

I think "we" let too many things like this occur and do nothing. And yet, at the same time, this very forum is chocked full of meaningless accusations of wrong-doing by politicians and entertainers, etc. If we are to hold politicians, etc to ethical standards, how can we not hold the average Joe Blow (or Phd candidate) to ethical standards?

Baron Max
 
Baron Max said:
I agree. But is it only about "profiting"? What about ethics? He knows about the situation ...if he does nothing, doesn't that reflect on his own character and ethics? ..which might come back and bite him on the ass?

If someone is doing something wrong, they should be exposed to the authorities in writing, with substantiating evidence.

I think "we" let too many things like this occur and do nothing. And yet, at the same time, this very forum is chocked full of meaningless accusations of wrong-doing by politicians and entertainers, etc. If we are to hold politicians, etc to ethical standards, how can we not hold the average Joe Blow (or Phd candidate) to ethical standards?

Baron Max
Click to expand...

Well, Baron, the reality is that if you get a black mark as a PhD student it is going to haunt you forever, i.e. end your career right there and then.

That's because you are totally dependent on references (except of the rare case of extreme brilliance). Your supervisor.

Let's say your supervisor gets into shit because you exposed another PI. Depending on the character of your own groupleader you could end up eating the dog turd for the rest of your life.

But it is nice to know you have ethics.
 
OK, so after all the discussion I have another question... Why this could back fire on me if I don't have anything to do with the PI involved on this, and am in a completely different program, it's like animal x plant? This may sound a bit stupid, but I am a new student...

How about bringing this up to the journal? Wouldn't they have to look it up? Can't I do this anonymously? I never thought it should be so hard to have ethics... I am really disappointed with all this...

Thanks you all for helping me.
 
cat77 said:
OK, so after all the discussion I have another question... Why this could back fire on me if I don't have anything to do with the PI involved on this, and am in a completely different program, it's like animal x plant? This may sound a bit stupid, but I am a new student...

How about bringing this up to the journal? Wouldn't they have to look it up? Can't I do this anonymously? I never thought it should be so hard to have ethics... I am really disappointed with all this...

Thanks you all for helping me.
Click to expand...

Institutes are besides places to do science also political networks.

Some pigs are more equal than others.

If you make trouble for one pig, it can haunt other pigs. Depends on how equal the pig is.

In my own institute there are many many groups, but only a few are important on a decision level. Others are expendable.

Now, apparently this 'faking' can't be something nobody knows. And since I know how it goes in our institute and others this means that nobody cares, or that maybe someone cares, but the person that fakes has some importance.

Of course it could be that just nobody knows, but if you say that the presentations for internal use show it clearly then clearly someone else must know too.

Groupleaders do get kicked from institutes for various reasons, or their budget cut, all depending on the model they are working with at the institute this can be heavily influenced by other people in the institute.

Even as in: that guy is going to fly at the next evaluation. The institute's reputation will be tarnished by exposure. Some will not like that. Some may like it that the 'right' thing was done.

Or everything is fine, and the best thing you can do is expose it.

I am giving you now the two extremes.

-----------
ok, let's digress now:

Photoshopping a figure doesn't of course mean that this group doesn't have the data. It could be that they do, but just not in a presentable form. Exposing that will not get you any thanks. We all do that. Trust me. Just some go further than others. And this is where ethics come into play I guess. Where is the boundary?

Photoshopping is not really allowed under any conditions. That is combining 2 distinct figures and representing them as one.

But what kind of can of worms are you unleashing if they do have the data to back up their claims, just not in the picture perfect form that Journals and reviewers nowadays seem to require for every publication, even the shitty ones.

The journal (unless it is one of the new open access ones) is just a business. They make money. They have a reputation to look out for of course, but that goes two ways. They rather not have their reputation tarnished. So no exposure would be better, unless there is pressure to do so. The fraud is so obvious on a central aspect of a publication.

I would have to see it first to make a judgement.

But it seems you have a good solid case. It's just that it is difficult to judge like this.

Anyway... you don't have to hurry with this I guess. It's been published. It has become the truth.

-------

I guess I am too far down the path of science to still be 'optimistic' about the politics behind science.
 
Thanks spuriousmonkey,

I can understand your point. I think I do still have some idealism... Not that's a bad thing, (not really sure now, because it's making me sick...).

I do have close contact with this group (only personal, not professional) - post docs, research professor, etc, and I do hear what's going on (they do believe it's wrong, but now they think they can wash their hands cause the PI knows).

I won't take any action for the time being, as the PI has really strong ethic values, but it seems that she/he won't believe her/his student would go so low. The PI has nothing to lose - will retire in a year or so. And I do hope some action will be taken, as some of the constructions got "lost", some of the originals got "lost"...

I don't think other people have realized about the data being fake... the student flipped, turned, smuggled some of the bands. You can see the same band several times on the thesis, and maybe on the paper. I don't think people would check figures on photoshop before approving a thesis or a paper, although this issue was brought to light by a reviewer from another journal... The PI just cursed him. I do think that journals should start asking for the raw data though... many times we get a paper denied and these suckers get to publish in nice journals.

Actually, as a matter of fact, the journal has open access...

Will keep you posted about it, and maybe show some pictures... I completely agree about photoshop, but there is a distinction between improving an image and creating one... To be honest, my main concern is not putting the person that told this to me on the line... that's why I haven't come forward yet.

Thanks!!
 
cat77 said:
What is my role in all this?
Click to expand...
You need to decide that for yourself. There is a choice to make and no one can make it for you. Personally, I think what is most important is that the fraud itself not be allowed to pervert science. I'm not clear on what field this is in, but you don't want people some day taking medications that were developed from fraudulent data. It's probably nothing that sensitive, but you see my point. If you allow fraud in scientific research, science suffers and civilization is held back by a tiny bit. It will take six other researchers reaching the opposite conclusion before this error is corrected, and in the meantime people will be accepting it as truth. That's more important than the careers of the people involved.

So I suggest that what you need to do is figure out the way to correct the error, rather than worrying about the success or failure of the people. In the old days, someone would sneak into the lab and destroy all records of the research, but that's usually impossible now with everything stored on computers.
And Gosh, how something like this can happen? And a PI just trust the student like that without at least asking to see the ORIGINALS?
Click to expand...
We are all too trusting. Nobody wants to live in a world in which you have to be suspicious of everyone, so we all pretend that we don't live in that world.

You are right to place the blame higher than the fraudulent student. The scientific process is supposed to be robust enough to intercept and correct fraud. That is what the important step of peer review is all about. Will this paper have to undergo peer review? If you think the alteration is obvious, someone else might see it also.

Just remember, your goal is not to get anyone punished. Your goal is to protect science and truth. Science is under attack these days and scientists lacking scruples will only make it worse.

I hope this helps.
 
Fraggle Rocker,

I think you said everything... And although it's a hard call, I'll figure out the best way to get things right. If I don't, I think I'll go nuts.

I think (again) I didn't make myself clear, I do not have a friendship with the person in question... actually I always had a bad feeling about him... Well, and this was making me worry if I was taking this personally...

Thanks for your posting.
 
I guess I just don't get it. What the hell good are "ethics" if one doesn't have the strength of their convictions/ethics to do something about what they feel is wrong? And worse, I think, is others here practically advising the guy not to do anything, to ignore his personal and professional ethics because it might not be fun for him!

I wonder if y'all have those same feelings about politicians and the sometimes sensational news items that come up in the news? Why advise this guy to ignore his ethics, yet be the first to jump on a politician because of his alleged unethical conduct?

I'm guessing, but some of y'all would probably advise others not to come forward even if you saw a vicious murder ...and you could all give some nice, rational reasons to skirt your ethical standards.

Why even have ethical standards if ya' ain't gonna' use for nothin'? ..except perhaps to condemn others for not living up to some ethical standards?

Sad, damned sad.

Cat77, do the right thing! Do what you're ethics is telling you to do ....turn the bastard(s) in to the appropriate authorites, and do so without personal malice towards anyone. It's the right thing to do, ......so do it.

Baron Max
 
Baron Max said:
I guess I just don't get it. What the hell good are "ethics" if one doesn't have the strength of their convictions/ethics to do something about what they feel is wrong? And worse, I think, is others here practically advising the guy not to do anything, to ignore his personal and professional ethics because it might not be fun for him! Do what you're ethics is telling you to do ....turn the bastard(s) in to the appropriate authorites, and do so without personal malice towards anyone.
Click to expand...
That's certainly the right thing to do if the particular ethical enforcement system that will be called into play is working. Unfortunately many of them are not. Our legal system is so fraught with corruption, racism and other biases that many people refuse to participate in it for their own personal safety. Right here in the nation's capital witnesses who dare to testify against relatively minor hoodlums in court are assassinated, cops who commit felonies aren't even taken off duty much less punished, and municipal governments only serve the wealthy and well-connected. Would you trust the microcosm justice systems in universities to be any more honest and accurate? Would you naively report the transgression of a scientist in training who had already inexplicably received the approval of his immediate superior? Would you not wonder who was already in on this, stop and think about who would be happy to trump up charges against you, for attempting to thwart their plan to get one more brown-nosing research assistant on staff who will rubber-stamp their billion-dollar project that might only kill a few hundred people a year?

This is what situational ethics is all about. You can't go through life blindly following rules that used to work. You have to be results-oriented. I say his primary goal is to prevent the fraudulent results from polluting science. His second priority is to do something about the perpetrators of the fraud, and that will involve finding out how many of them there are and how highly they're placed. Depending on the results of that investigation, he may need some serious help in order to accomplish anything.

There is enough evidence to at least suspect that corruption in this country goes all the way up to the Vice President's office. It's not unreasonable in this ethical climate to stop and ponder whether key university personnel are involved in the fraud being investigated, and will at least thwart the investigation and at worst punish the investigator. Letting that happen out of naivete serves no purpose and does not "do good" for anyone.
 
I guess ethics is just a word we toss around in psycho-babble sessions, huh?

Or to use to accuse politicians and rich people of flaunting, maybe. Ethics is only what other people should do or say, but we can make all the excuses we need to keep from following any form of ethics by deeming it too hard or too difficult.

Situational ethics? Interesting.

Baron Max
 
Two of our units in Biomedical Science have covered research ethics, and BOTH have repeatedly stressed to report any suspected misconduct to the relevant authorities.

Things may be a little more complex than what they taught us, but I still think it's important that you act with integrity, and expose deception. Not only does such deception mislead other scientists and the general public, it gives scientists as a whole a bad name.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for all the comments.

Actually I think my university has a pretty good set up for investigating fraud suspects and protecting the whistle blower. They REALLY stressed it during our orientation day, and I participated of NSF seminars about fraud and they emphasized we should be pro-active against it. Ok, I know reality is a bit different.

My major concern is about getting my friend involved in all this, as I wasn't suppose to know anything. But many people (not involved) knows.

I probably will wait and give the PI some time, and then if nothing happens will make things straight. What the hell, if I can't stick with my moral values I probably need to consider going back to my profession (I have a first-professional doctorate).

Well, I knew this wasn't an easy question, and it brought a lot of discussion...
I really appreciate all opinions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top