Skip to main content
Premium Trial:

Request an Annual Quote

So, Whose Business Is it Anyway?

Ben Goldacre at Bad Science recounts the experience of Ivan Oransky and Adam Marcus at Retraction Watch when they tried to ascertain the circumstances surrounding the retraction of a 2004 Annals of Thoracic Surgery paper. When Oransky and Marcus contacted the journal's editor to find out why the paper had been retracted, they were told it was "none of your damn business." This isn't entirely uncommon, Goldacre says. Paper retraction notices, like the one published in ATS, can be "uninformative" and "opaque," which Goldacre says indicates "a systemic failure, across all fields."

In the Pipeline's Derek Lowe says journals must disclose "as much as possible" as to the reasons behind a paper's retraction. "There are all sorts of reasons for papers to be retracted, ranging from benign to evil, and it's in the interest of readers to know what category things have fallen into," he says. Even if the paper is the subject of an ongoing investigation, journals can still release some details surrounding the research without compromising its review, Lowe adds.

The Scan

Vaccine Update Recommended

A US Food and Drug Administration panel recommends booster vaccines be updated to target Omicron, CNBC reports.

US to Make More Vaccines for Monkeypox Available

The US is to make nearly 300,000 vaccine doses available in the coming weeks to stem the spread of human monkeypox virus, according to NPR.

Sentence Appealed

The Associated Press reports that Swedish prosecutors are appealing the sentence given to a surgeon once lauded for transplanting synthetic tracheas but then convicted of causing bodily harm.

Genome Biology Papers on COVID-19 Effector Genes, Virtual ChIP-seq, scDART

In Genome Biology this week: proposed COVID-19 effector genes, method to predict transcription factor binding patterns, and more.