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 When Oransky and Marcus contacted the journal's editor to find out why the paper had been retracted, they were told it was "none of your damn business."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

Billions for Antivirals

The US is putting $3.2 billion toward a program to develop antivirals to treat COVID-19 in its early stages, the Wall Street Journal reports.

NFT of the Web

Tim Berners-Lee, who developed the World Wide Web, is auctioning its original source code as a non-fungible token, Reuters reports.

23andMe on the Nasdaq

23andMe's shares rose more than 20 percent following its merger with a special purpose acquisition company, as GenomeWeb has reported.

Science Papers Present GWAS of Brain Structure, System for Controlled Gene Transfer

In Science this week: genome-wide association study ties variants to white matter stricture in the brain, and more.