Top
Best
New

Posted by mhrmsn 12 hours ago

How much of Thermo Fisher's antibody data has been manipulated?(reeserichardson.blog)
322 points | 70 commentspage 2
arcade79 7 hours ago|
I have no idea about this catalogue, however, looking at the article and how the image manipulation has happened - it looks very much like "repro" work back in the day.

Anything that large companies published in/as magazines, etc, back in the 80/90s first went to a design company. Then to a repro company for the "finishing touches" to make it look nice. Faces were touched up, photo artifacts was removed, everything was to look neat and tidy.

This looks so much like that. I wouldn't be surprised if Thermo Fisher still ran everything that is to be published through a marketing/repro cycle, who has tampered with this without realizing what it looks like.

It'll be interesting to see if any actual data has been changed, or just the presentation of the data.

pu_pe 7 hours ago||
No marketing or design company would duplicate a band from another experiment (taking care to rotate it to make it look different nonetheless). Even in that unlikely scenario, Thermo Fisher is still responsible for the scientific data they publish.
20k 3 hours ago|||
In some of the experiments, the same random noise background exists with different black blobs superimposed at where you expect the correct value to be. Ie they took a fixed realistic-ish looking background, and drew in the 'correct' values

Its hard to argue that that isn't fraud as a result. It isn't touching up existing data, its fully fabricating data

rcxdude 7 hours ago|||
The background painting could maybe be explained like this (depending on what was hidden), but I don't think the duplicated blobs have a good explanation, especially because some were rotated to try to hide the manipulation.
codedokode 6 hours ago||
I disagree. If you look at the photos the painting used to make black blobs shorter. As I understand, black blob vertical position is the weight of a molecule, and they want to hide the fact that there are heavier or lighter molecules. So originally there was a long blob, and they made it look shorter.
stebunovd 2 hours ago||
Apparently, the authors of the original paper haven't yet learned to use AI. Their successors, however, will almost certainly do a better job of it.
mjg59 2 hours ago|
What paper? This is about several hundred datasheets.
LastTrain 7 hours ago||
Have the samples found so far, in general, been edited in a way to increase value or potential sales volume? Or are they just more pretty?
Faaak 6 hours ago||
More pretty, which would signify that the sample has less impurities -> better value
BoredPositron 6 hours ago||
Some are just completely fabricated so it's hard to say if they have equivalent uglier images with real data...
fp64 6 hours ago||
My most generous interpretation would be: the marketing/website team didn't get the pictures in time from the respective teams, so without much thinking they edited some. Like those print-on-demand t-shirt websites that don't have real models wearing the real shirts but crappy photoshop composites.
feverzsj 3 hours ago||
It's like 90% biomedicine papers are like this.
airstrike 2 hours ago||
why isn't their stock tanking
biofox 5 hours ago||
Holy shmoly... I'm a biologist who has used Thermo antibodies before, and this is seriously disappointing to see.
voidUpdate 6 hours ago||
Someone call bobbybroccoli, they've got a new video to make :P
mklyachman 5 hours ago||
Reminds me a lot of the Schon scandal. TLDR is (now-obviously-a-fraud) generational physicist kept publishing breathtaking work about semiconductors, was caught because two of his error distributions were identical
More comments...