This Scientist catches FRAUD in Harvard and Stanford Research

[@twentytwentyeight]

Ironic that the mandatory plagiarism checks we are trained to fear as undergrads disappear the higher into academia one reaches 😢

[@markmcflounder15]

Yeah!!! Right! Nice point The irony is palpable!

[@Flylikea]

Data manipulation is far worse. Using a random image as an undergraduate is not the same as submitting a random image as evidence in a research. I am not saying "hey, everyone grab your torches", there could be cases of human error, including error in judgment, but still the idea is to fix the error.

[@Bambotb]

😂😂 people are hypocrite scul

[@Triple_J.1]

People who rise to positions of authority are generally out to prove something to the world and to themselves. Because they lack a self and are driven to create an image of one. This is a hallmark of Cluster-B disorders. Source: DSM-5

[@Think-dont-believe]

@@Flylikeaa cheat is a cheat is a cheat. She was tipped off bad culture … Why.. it’s run by a cheat..

[@JohnS-il1dr]

The college will now try to discredit her with false allegations.

[@99iwaena]

Yup, their probably has a dedicated group of people presently trying to discredit her findings! 🧐

[@RobotNannyDiaries]

Shes a racist? Or a Right Wing extremist? Or perhaps a TERF?

[@rrbb36]

@@99iwaena”their” ?

[@richardschneider294]

@@rrbb36?

[@debbiehuth9742]

​@@rrbb36 " really", nit picking

[@stischer47]

As a former PhD student and prof, the number of profs who claimed the work of their assistants is disgusting. Add to it the pressure to "get the results" even though they may not exist, especially with well-known researchers, is even worse.

[@susanc4622]

McBride is the most notorious case in Australia. He did something great and then decided he wanted to do something great again- but committed data fraud to do it.

[@peterwilson8039]

It’s perfectly acceptable for a supervisor’s name to appear as a co-author, but the supervisor should be involved in the science and should take responsibility for supervising the junior researcher. That’s where training is supposed to be happening.

[@robbieelliot9491]

When at uni PHD students used to discuss how supervisors took credit for work when it wasn't theirs.

[@peterwilson8039]

@@robbieelliot9491 Apart from anything else, the supervisors name on the paper might help to get the work published.

[@jplacido9999]

Problem exististing for decades now... (apropriation of assistant work...)

[@lbride3738]

Dr Bik's name should be used as an award (the Bik award), given away yearly to Data detective. Someone should start crowdfunding asap.

[@ktinxx]

@lbride3738 Brilliant idea! 👍

[@wwjccsd]

Sadly she didn’t work with someone named Richard or we could of had the Bik Dick award

[@TheDaftySage]

Or it could be more like a Darwin award for the year's biggest and most incompetent fraudster.

[@sobbski2672]

Encourages peer reviewing. Good idea

[@neurodeee]

Maybe I'm too cynical, but I'd almost want to see a "Darwin award"-like anti-award show for most egregious data fraud, in order to raise attention. _The Retracties_ 🏆

[@lectinfreesolutions8478]

And this is exactly why we should always question everything, especially the SCIENCE

[@DavidRodriguez-gl5pn]

Well it’s SUPPOSED to be peer reviewed

[@Christoff070]

Test

[@wwiiinplastic4712]

You can question science, just not The Science.

[@Titlegal]

Please start with climate

[@rdhunkins]

I hate the expression "The Science" as if it's holy writ. Science can always be falsified, or corrected. Copernicus falsified Ptolemy, Bacon falsified Aristotle. Einstein augmented Newton. Michaelson and Morley falsified the idea "The Aether". Science is a method, not scripture. It's always falsifiable. It has to be done with tangible proof, and the proof has to be with data that is valid, not faked, not massaged - Like Climate change data is.

[@trevjaywill387]

Elisabeth Bik - The researcher who researches researcher's research so that we can know when they are lying to us. So sad its come to this, but so grateful for her bravery and courage! Very inspirational

[@neoqwerty]

Definitely not sad, she's the PERFECT example for why science is not only finding new things to research, but also to study what WAS researched before and see if it still holds up. Even discounting when some a-holes are fudging and data-massaging their results, there's just times where our measuring tech gets better and more and more accurate, when theories finally become measurable, and when genuine errors that weren't caught need to be re-checked, because that's what science is about. It's really cool to FINALLY see someone getting recognition for the massively important work of re-checking and re-verifying published data, because funny enough? THAT'S the vast majority of researchers, quietly working to make sure that everything checks out and when it doesn't, what went wrong in the methodology and how to redo the work correctly. (can you tell I like to nerd out in the sciences?)

[@sweep_auto]

@@neoqwertyvery true. Verification of other works a huge part of the scientific method and super important to progress.

[@denofpigs2575]

​@@neoqwertyIs it really the vast majority when the replication crisis was only discovered about 2016?

[@Hakagure]

​@@denofpigs2575being discovered and reported on in 2016 didn't mean it didn't exist prior. It has happened like this for a LONG time

[@spacewater7]

Well these days we the people need police to investigate the police who investigate the police too. Used to be we could rely on journalists to do that when all else failed but - even they're refusing to critically investigate their own profession.

[@bdcochran01]

Not surprising. 40 years ago two profs had a required book (which they wrote, of course). It was impossible for one of the guys to have been a co-author as his daily work would not permitted the same. The required book was leaving something out. I went to a graduate library and found the material within minutes. The textbook was bulk lifted , word for tranlated word, from a book published in 1910 by a Frenchman. Similarly, a school was hot to trot to publish an article. The purported author was not capable of producing the article which was rather disjointed. I went to a specialist public library and within 15 minutes found it had been published at Stanford 6 months earlier. The student was not disciplined. My sister sat on many doctoral committees and more than a few theses had significant defects.

[@rosebronikowski2022]

Academia, in the US anyway, is pretty much B.S.

[@zinhlekheswa5237]

😮

[@NChrysostomides]

Imagine how many people used these works as reference , multiplying the misinformation in the highest level

[@MelissaR784]

And government policies/ laws are then based on them....school books are printed with the same misinformation.😮

[@vicom134]

@@MelissaR784To be fair though, unless images are heavily edited across a paper, 1 or 2 manipulations wouldn’t heavily change the overall conclusions of this paper. Those things are obviously fraud and should be absolutely called out though.

[@MelissaR784]

@@vicom134 One manipulation is all that's needed to alter the facts. It weakens the whole structure of integrity and trust. That's the way I see it. You can fool some of the people some of the time, but you can't fool all the people all of the time without consequences.

[@vicom134]

@@MelissaR784 Oh of course, that’s a given. This trend is absolutely horrifying. My point was more that it’s very unlikely that copying one western blot band would be the base on entire policies.

[@MelissaR784]

@@vicom134 I hear ya.

[@gzhang207]

In my field of research, a famed professor made a remark at a conference that some people wrote research papers faster than he could read them.

[@7792pnaurfr]

Usually it's undergrad or grad students who wrote them. Established professors and scientists almost never write their papers.

[@albertoandrade9807]

The queen herself!!! I must admit she made me a little jaded. In the past I would think most issues in research were due to sloppy procedures. Her uncovering so much outright fraud now made me assume evil intentions until proven otherwise

[@WobblesandBean]

Same. As a woman in STEM I've seen it myself, academia is a boy's club and they protect one another. A perfect example is Frederick Schöen, it was a woman who first blew the whistle on his fraudulent research, and she was not only ignored, but ostracized. It wasn't until she'd convinced a male colleague to go over her findings and raise the alarm again that the scientific community took it seriously, because now it was coming from another man. Most senior researchers are men from older generations, and sadly those generational attitudes towards women and certain minorities is still very much an issue.

[@axeman2638]

hey, cool it with the anti-semitic remarks man.

[@michaelwatson7211]

I don't think that's what she's saying, it sounds like you have pushy bullying bosses who don't care about quality/ turn a blind eye to bad practice. Then you have young naive PhD students doing the 'fraud' just to deal with the stress/ without knowing it's wrong. You don't have to think anyone is evil there, it's just bad incentives and high pressure.

[@CzAnimations]

​@@axeman2638what

[@wilburdemitel8468]

@@michaelwatson7211 no man, academia is full of shit.

[@michaelstone3069]

Can't remember where or when I 1st heard the following "You know bull 💩 is headed your way when you hear recent studies suggest"

[@waltp5798]

Thank you, Dr. Bik. We need more honest people in this world of corruption and lies!

[@h.yadigarece1446]

As a chemist and into cancer studies, I found about her during my PhD. She`s awesome😊😊

[@sportysbusiness]

When you write 'cancer studies', are you trying to find actual cures or just drugs that can make money? All the cancer research I can find disappointingly focuses on profitable treatments and deliberately ignores natural cures. (BTW, I cured myself from breast cancer using a therapeutic ketogenic diet, a rife machine, RSO oil and anti parasitic drugs).

[@duaneaikins4621]

@@sportysbusinessI’m glad you are not a researcher.

[@handynothandsome261]

I cured my wife’s bone cancer with some of my own proprietary “bone cancer elixir,” and those snooty fellows at the cancer clinic with their fancy “chemotherapy” took all the credit for curing her… PFFF!!… Quacks!! (Actually, my wife WAS cured of “localized metastatic” Ewing’s sarcoma by a brilliant group of cancer research physicians, to whom I could not be more grateful)… Oh, and yes, I DO understand that “localized” and “metastatic” are conflicting terms- but the description came from the fact that she had four individual tumors, but all had relatively defined borders on imaging. She was cured after two rounds of chemo, and minor surgery to apply a “chemo pack” directly to the large tumor in her distal femur.

[@Katrin_GNM]

Have you heard of the 5 biological laws discovered by Dr.Hamer? they explain so called 'cancer' as well as other 'diseases' perfectly well and are actually science based.

[@dinaguzun8545]

I have so much respect towards Elisabeth Bik! She is doing a favor not only to the science but to the humanity in general.

[@franks4973]

I agree, there should be a bik award. Thank you Ms. Bik for this service! Keep integrity in our universities. Need to expand this to other fields.

[@aaronbredon2948]

We really need a Journal dedicated to publishing debunks of papers from other Journals, and rating the percentage of flaws, fraud, retractions, and especially unretracted flawed/fraudulent papers. And it should have a searchable index so other scientists can search an author, paper or Journal to see if it should be trusted. If that were created, the incentive would change - after all, no scientist or Journal would want to be considered “don’t trust anything from this source” or even “double check before trusting”.

[@CZpersi]

Journal of Paper Retraction😂 And guess what? There would be fake papers in that journal sooner or later.

[@aaronbredon2948]

@CZpersi so? Any paper in that journal would be an indication that another study needed to be done before the original could be trusted. And the other journals would be happy to debunk any fake papers in that journal. And the problem right now is that the existing journals don't print studies disputing previously published results. There currently isn't an adversarial approach for papers published by big names except in hard science fields. The point of a journal dedicated to exposing problems is that it creates that adversarial process - it provides a resource for publishing papers that dispute earlier papers. Peet review is supposed to be only step one of the scientific validation system. Step 2 is published papers disputing or corroborating the results. If it is impossible to publish studies that achieve the opposite result as prior studies, we lose the checks and balances. It is less important to have quality studies against an existing paper - once a dispute exists, other scientists will do work to establish which is more accurate. And if the original papers by an author are shown to have characteristic flaws, those flaws will be looked for, and that author will be required to provide more evidence they didn’t make that mistake. It is the process that is needed. Currently, the process is being diverted in that famous researchers can publish papers refuting less famous people's work, but not vice versa.

[@geminiflower]

I would pay good money to subscribe to that journal!

[@goldenmoon2023]

Agreed.. such a Journal is absolutely needed. But who will bell the cat?

[@aaronbredon2948]

The thing is that any Journal publisher could create such a journal, and it could become profitable. Such a journal would probably start as a multidisciplinary journal. But a journal like that might have trouble getting citations on the papers published within, leading to potentially low relevance ratings.

[@mathewphoria7228]

It feels like these "peer reviewed" papers or studies are never actually "peer reviewed" even. thank you for highlighting this!

[@7792pnaurfr]

I believe they are, not just not reviewed well.

[@susanc4622]

Review and audit are different things, probably.

[@vicom134]

Just because some people do data fraud, doesn’t mean that the entire system is fraudulent, though. Plenty of peer reviews are done correctly and are efficient.

[@Triple_J.1]

"Peer reviewed" is not the same as "Peer tested and validated"

[@vicom134]

@@Triple_J.1 That does not mean that peer review is not efficient or useless though. It would be impossible for a third party to test every experiment of a paper before publishing it.

[@JoeKovacic]

I love this person, cheaters need to be discredited as well as the institutions that allowed this disgrace to go unnoticed and unpunished.

[@kennethhymes9734]

I was one of many people who "collected" "data" for the landmark Annenberg study of violence on television. We were mostly teenagers and random adults with free time in the day, watching primetime dramas on black and white video tape reels, no ads, in a converted classroom, deciding with no real guidance whether a particular scene contained an act of violence and of what category and severity, and various other pieces of highly subjective assessment. This was one end of the study, I can only imagine what W.E.I.R.D. and other structural problems existed on the "effects" end. Just a vortex of self reporting and questionable quantization of culture.

[@roryfletcher1827]

She’s a complete star! Deserves more recognition for her services to science.

[@bridecolbourne1305]

Bravo ! Bravo! This is what humanity needs more of , shining the 🌅 on frauds 🙏🏼🌎🌍🌏

[@douginorlando6260]

First thing to do is create a list of journals who ignore their published fraudulent papers. Such journals need to be called out.

[@douginorlando6260]

KZbin still bans comments that go against the “safe and effective” narrative … including exposing fake research papers

[@willmv4139]

Dear Elisabeth Bik, you make me proud being a Dutch. This about the only time that our Dutch...I know better...finger in the sky...is really working for the world. Thank you!!

[@marycw]

Wow!!! Good work Elisabeth Bik and thanks for reporting here Pete!

[@fluxpistol3608]

How do I do this as a job? This field needs more people

[@sandyacombs]

Bik's work and yours Pete are so important and the cumulative affect will kick in some day and facilitate change. In every branch of science this is happening.

[@MrSammer1972]

It won't. She won't fact check any study that goes against her ideology. It will just get worse with the ideology she agrees with

[@markjaycox7524]

I've noticed the same situation with bad (ignoring Equality) judicial judgements/Orders. Interestingly, Judge's Orders are often not written by the Judge, but are instead written for the Judge by the prevailing attorney. Judges tend to reinforce and support each other's Orders, and are loathe to either revisit their own judgements, or second-guess another Judge's Order. While there are processes to try and change Orders (Reconsideration, Appeal, etc), these processes become increasingly complex, time-consuming (often time-sensitive), and costly for the average person to pursue. These judicial processes (re: Peer Review) also face an uphill battle against the built-in protection culture, especially with regard to Civil Law (particularly Family Law) -- where evidentiary requirements are often much lower than in Criminal Cases. I experienced this personally, and on a massive scale for countless others, through an organization I'm part of that seeks parental equality for fathers. It's interesting and sad how facts, whether scientific or legal, can be misconstrued and outright falsified for expediency and accolades.

[@CSGATI]

We need to push the smart ones, not the frauds. Go Girl

[@ivacheung792]

Wow, what an amazing person! She has a superpower she's using for good. I love her comment, too, about lab culture. I've been in toxic labs as well as supportive ones, and I can totally see toxic labs being hotbeds of academic fraud. Thanks for this interview, Pete!

[@RedStickHistorian]

This really hits home because I'm so skeptical of the information around the recent pandemic and what government leaders and scientists were saying, and this is on top of the mainstream press pushing a narrative that suited the "correct" political message.

[@TheKitty1952]

Not all heroes wear capes...thank you for seeing through the patterns of deceit.

[@InsideKarensHead]

YES! Excellent work. Finally people are paying closer attention to those who think they have special permission to lie.

[@liberty-matrix]

"The problem with science is science follows the money." ~Russell Brand

[@admthrawnuru]

And ego. Both are problems

[@not_ever]

The pot calling the kettle black. Even Russel Brand is right twice a day.

[@chickadeeacres3864]

@@admthrawnuruit’s the ego, because the ego believes that money can bring happiness

[@nigelmcculloch3746]

That's why evolution theory survives, the evidence of design on the earth right down to the DNA shows a greater mind at work!

[@monkeysezbegood]

This is a modern problem and why universities should be govt funded with no strings attached.

[@elysiumnat2958]

What is consequence of this??? Where’s the disciplinary? Apart from being moved on 😢

[@nosotrosloslobosestamosreg4115]

If the liars are woke, it's okay for they're on the right side of history.

[@truekingvictory]

This is one of the big problems. Saw this myself at my time at Harvard. I saw fraud that was handsomely rewarded, and when concerns were brought to the authorities, the response was "It would cause more damage than good to expose this." I still believe in the scientific method, but the current academic community has tainted it almost beyond redemption with Pride and Greed.

[@blogdesign7126]

​ Its a result of "Blame the Hero" in society in general. Remember two decades ago when Andrew Wakefield was exposed for fraud by journalist Brian Deer over his vaccine study. But then again its a different era.

[@WobblesandBean]

​@@truekingvictoryYup. I've seen it firsthand, especially here in silicon valley. Higher-ups demand unicorn results cuz they've already preemptively sold investors on non-existent magic results, so there's an unspoken expectation to tweak the data to match the desired result.

[@no-ah3185]

The magnitude of these problems reach far beyond what leadership/management are willing to confront. To address these in a meaningful way would require an extraordinary amount of upheaval and then the inevitable unraveling of fabricated integrity. The amount of bullying and intimidation any individual attempting such an investigation makes it an unlikely reality.

[@ollieoniel]

Great to see science policing itself better and better. Elisabeth Bik is awesome. Great Video Pete.

[@eidiazcas]

software makes it easier to detect fraud as much as software makes it easier to commit fraud, we need more independent duplication as review in science

[@SuperFinGuy]

That's what peer-review actually is, reproduction. Not giving your stamp of approval lol

[@eidiazcas]

@@SuperFinGuy not as it currently works, peer review doesnt imply replication at all, it might be part of the process in some cases but not mandatory

[@SuperFinGuy]

@@eidiazcas Yeah what we have these days is buddy-review.

[@kyriosity-at-github]

The solution is obvious. Prove with software but lock researches in a room without any comps.

[@sirbaguette8378]

​@@SuperFinGuy that's not what peer-review is... In majority of scientific fields, peer review is literally just another scientist reading your manuscript to make sure everything makes sense, there's no errors and is written in the proper manner. No peer reviewer (who is also a researcher themselves) has the time nor money to replicate every study they're tasked to review, especially as peer reviewing is unpaid.

[@BigD365]

They say numbers don't lie, but they can.

[@grasshopper7760]

Thank you for keeping these issues on the forefront

[@Halkin85]

Love that you got Elisabeth Bik on! I have been raving about her work for years and she is definitely a hero. Also, shocking that one person mainly using her eyes has uncovered some of the largest scientific fraud cases in the world.

[@sandyfoot]

Brilliant! Absolute respect. I am trained to find cancer cells in cell preparations. Maybe 1 cell in 40,000. I know exactly what she means by ‘using her eyes’. It’s an art.

[@patriciaroysdon9540]

That is so true. Not everyone can develop that talent.

[@jesseparrish1993]

Every research institution should have an Elizabeth Bik and require data sharing with said person, no exceptions.

[@AndyJarman]

I was recently to of an Australia university where overseas students are given reports prepared by native English speaker's to counteract their disadvantage.

[@Zaguzah]

Dr. Bix seems like a lovely person doing important work.

[@Tronous117]

Bullying is something happens all too often in labs. One advisor, who I left, was so harsh on his Chinese student that often 4 years into his PhD he just got a plane and left. Only told his advisor once he was on the plan.

[@picksalot1]

We need more people like Elisabeth Bik. But more pragmatically, we need AI to detect the lying, plagiarism, false conclusions, inaccuracies, biased/corporate sponsored agenda driven "research," etc. that is corrupting Scientific Papers, and Science in general to such a degree that much of it comes across as political an business driven manipulation. We need better ways of assessing the veracity of Research, News, and Information.

[@BlackCat69909]

Not sure "AI" will be the answer here. I'd advocate for change in academia first anyway, the culture needs to shift.

[@bytesizebiotech]

The software that's being used to detect many of these duplications are constantly being improved upon. What we need it larger databases of existing literature. Currently, only ImageTwin has a database of publications and images to compare against.

[@biguattipoptropica]

AI is prone to both false positives and false negatives. I’m curious why people always advocate for “easy” solutions that don’t solve anything and assume one dimensional bad actors behind everything. The video itself cites multiple motives and situations-I highly doubt a random commenter on the internet has more insight than a respected professional.

[@marybusch6182]

Peter boyle has an excellent episode on AI. And i no longer believe in the latest paradigm since there have been so many false paradigms in USA healthacare.

[@m.a.nugent8278]

And you would trust AI???!!!

[@davidlange-lw6hc]

One of the problems with publishing “peer-reviewed” papers is that the editors and reviewers are buddy-buddy with the authors (who may even be reviewers for the journal. The other can of worms is industry-sponsored research.

[@ManyaAfonso-z2c]

This lady deserves the medal of honor given by our king (Willem Alexander of the Netherlands) on his birthday.

[@sdorr]

Excellent. EB should get an award. There have been cultural problems of that sort at Stanford & other research universities, of course, for many decades. Bullying is ubiquitous!

[@ray2022003]

If it hasn't been suggested, then I suggest that Elizabeth create a website for fraudulent papers if the publishers are not willing to take action.

[@dionwall5519]

Amazing and essential work by Dr Bik! Science is to valuable to be left to the academic black box. Bad science and bad policy flow in both directions.

[@pankajchand6761]

NSF and other US funding agencies should stop deferring to each universities' administration to investigate their own faculty and researchers with regard to research misconduct allegations. That is the main cause of the problem. The rot stems from NSF.

[@vastthegap3390]

This is more important, and needs to be more widely public than it currently is …kudos

[@seanmatthews8280]

The Infamous Stanford and Harvard busted again!!

[@desmond-hawkins]

Congrats on getting this interview! I found it surprising that she started by saying she mostly finds duplicates with her eyes, this seems to indicate that the software she's using does help, but not enough. It would be good to see an effort funded to make these tools better and give them access to more papers and more data. Content-based image retrieval is an active research topic in computer science and there's a lot of good tech available. She might have a talent for it, but her time and skill are really not scalable given the volume of research being published.

[@marigeo24]

A whooole lot of published academics just realized they’ll be looking over their backs for the rest of their lives now.

[@beefchicken]

You would hope so, but as Elisabeth said, many of the journals have absolutely no interest in shining a spotlight on the fraud taking place between their own covers.

[@2bfrank657]

Ha ha, I hope so 😂

[@localbgr4074]

Thank you to both of you for doing what you guys do. I hope academics would find a way to keep the integrity in check. Best wishes to Dr Bik and to the academic bro Pete.

[@VicecrackVoldermort]

Why are all these prestigious universities having people making such blatant plagiarisms?

[@Arcane_Pulse-f7n]

"prestigious" is the main culprit, instead of working hard they want prestige by any means because they know the name Harvard is enough for someone to believe whatever they say.

[@VicecrackVoldermort]

@@Arcane_Pulse-f7n The two parts of your statement do not connect logically. But I get what you mean. Honestly, now that I think about it, it might not even be a prestigious university problem but an academic-paper problem. These cases are just high profile because of the status and the fact that we hold the best of the best in America rightfully to higher standards.

[@Arcane_Pulse-f7n]

That's the problem, because prestigious figures used to study in these universities, that's why it is called prestigious. Aristotle didn't study in Harvard yet Harvard would hire Aristotle if he was alive, Harvard didn't create Aristotle but because Aristotle studied in Harvard that's why it is called prestigious, but in 2024 these terms are valueless, if you have talent, you can watch Harvard/Oxford lectures on KZbin and maybe in Future you would become a Professor at Harvard without studying in it!@@VicecrackVoldermort

[@bytesizebiotech]

They don't expect to be caught and there's monetary incentive to publish...

[@Arcane_Pulse-f7n]

They don't expect to be caught because they know that no one would question about Harvard's standard, that's why we should not trust in anything blindly specially in 2024.@@bytesizebiotech

[@TheIgnoramus]

I would like to add that secrecy in labs also leads to impropriety. In Gov or public sector.

[@RechtmanDon]

Why do they do it? "Follow the Money."

[@MelissaR784]

Philanthropist donate millions to academia through their tax exempt Foundations.

[@RechtmanDon]

@@MelissaR784 Enlightened societies do not have to depend on philanthropists; their governments provide the funding, as they recognize the necessity for education and for research that is humanity-driven rather than profit-driven.

[@MelissaR784]

@@RechtmanDon Who's money are we to follow then if it's not the millionaires and billionaires?

[@RechtmanDon]

@aR784 Try the MIC. Your and my tax dollars help fund it, making us and all taxpayers involuntarily complicit in the genocide.

[@MelissaR784]

@@RechtmanDon Philanthtope News Digest explains all that they fund.

[@jpkjnn6733]

Thank you for the work you're doing. This is very important work. Not just to catch bad actors, but to try and reform the system which encourages this kind of behavior. When it comes to important treatment of terrible diseases and conditions, we have to be able to trust the work being done by our scientists. This sort of thing makes the entire system look bad, and we need this work being done.

[@l.d.m.33]

Can you do more on bullying in academia, please?

[@nikkid4890]

Yes please!

[@uqox]

I heard about Dr. Bik some time ago and greatly appreciate you elevating her work on your channel.

[@slappy8941]

They're all crooks.

[@vicom134]

All scientists?

[@ayougo]

True scientific brilliance is rare these days. Many PhDs graduates put in the grind but are not original thinkers. I’ve seen this first hand, using bad data, poor critical thinking, a general lack of creativity and in the physics realm, poor math literacy.

[@orion9k]

They should serve jail time +5 years for this kind of fraud

[@liztopia5490]

Thank you Dr. Bik! You are truly amazing. We need more of you in this world.

[@kapilchhabria1727]

Pause and consider this: Dr. Bix, operates in a male dominated field, with an aggressively patriarchal culture, and she calls out those who have been elevated to the highest echelons. She is not the hero we deserve, she is the hero we need.

[@reina4969]

*rolls eyes*

[@felipeherrerasalinas9488]

Like the Harvard president who resigned… lol, being a cheat doesn’t come with sex, return to reality friend.

[@Hakagure]

The people she calls out never seem to be the patriarchal white man either. It's always women and people of complexion

[@echotango4591]

@@Hakagurethat is absolute shit lol just a straight up lie

[@rakshithm1257]

​@@HakagureWhat sort of bullshit logic is that?

[@makersmark1974]

Can i just say; "Elizabeth Bik is one person I'd be thrilled to work for".. I always enjoy working for those whom call out liars..🤙🙏

[@WhyInnovate]

Most of academic research is broken, as a PhD student your start with good intentions then get broken

[@littlestewart]

Huge respect to Dr. Bik, she did a great job

[@chazzcannon3614]

One good study would be on the epidemiology of narcissism in academia and research.

[@Sami_K99]

Thank you Dr. Bik for your work. I hope there were a lot of academics like you who look into big labs, especially those with big claims in their papers

[@ryancormack6934]

This should be a discipline unto itself. Bik could be the founder of hjd discipline. Way too many bad apples gaming the system and giving science a bad reputation.

[@tombodet7918]

Thank you ! All we can do is point out these issues and Hope that something is done to correct them

[@platynowa]

At 1:40 I think two fragments were cut from the picture on the right to the panel on the left. I think the one below marked left picture is just the lower-right corner of the picture on the right, just zoomed in and with enhanced brightness.

[@Stone_Orchids]

Great one! Big admiration for her, she's a hero amongst heroes

[@stylisticus]

I really wish Elizabeth would take a look at the current climate (emergency) journal output.

[@alihenderson5910]

Yes, but it wouldn't matter. There's no stopping the agenda now, regardless of the obvious fraud.

[@ravenecho2410]

Can u go over why what they're doing statistically biases results (reuse from other papers, from same paper, why manipulating data or selective denoising affects the mean and things)? It would be nice to tie these observations back into significance testing, study design, and meta-analysis

[@crystalwhitesevenvalleyssa4351]

Is great too see integrity and ethics. Thank you.

[@Addictedtoyoutube9]

Ackman wife should be investigated and charged despite the lawsuit she filed

[@rof8200]

Thank you for opening our eyes. Well done Pete.

[@catdogky]

We just can’t believe anyone anymore!! Especially “experts” in their fields!!

[@momol.9892]

We need more people like Dr Bik to speak out the truth!

[@JACKDAWFISH]

Love it! I, like Dr. Bix see patterns. It also help to have a really good memory. What she does can be applied to everything, especially politics and social controls. (Hint I how someone from the CIA and they make full use of the fact that after 7 years, most people forget mostly everthing.) Sadly the truth is most people are liars cheaters and back stabbers. I saw this pattern everywhere especially where there are too many people vying for the same commodity (job, food, award, etc).

[@anthonysanlucas6437]

Thank you for taking your time to inform us parents of the reality of the colleges and universities. Have you ever considered interviewing Dr. James Tour? He is also a warrior fighting to restore intellectual honesty and integrity to the academies.

[@happygardener28]

This reminds me of a Huge scandal at prestigious universities, aired on either 48 Hours or 60 Minutes, back in the 1980s or early 1990s. Those students, and those who graduated just prior, would be professors or senior executives now.

[@peterdowney1492]

If in 4, 5, 6 months time we find that peer reviewers are not using the software, if we find that they are not strongly being advised to do so, then we will clearly see how corrupt the system is. Excellent video.

[@not_ever]

If “this” is using the image ai detection, it should not be up to the peer reviewers to do so since it can easily be automated and part of the journal or conference submission process. A paper like this shouldn’t even reach peer review if the tools are properly integrated.

[@oaklandgargoyle]

A 2 hour interview detailing how the scientific community is rewarded would be awesome!

[@robertwoods3750]

until a funding method is developed that supports scientific research and not some special interest albeit governments, wealthy donors, etc. there will always be graft, corruption. i applaud Ms. Bik and wish her continued success in her endeavors to be "real".

[@danielduarte5073]

Thank you for your due diligence and integrity!

[@celinemartinez7831]

As just a regular person, college educated and later a professional in Academia, I became disillusioned with that environment. Education on every level was becoming devoid of appreciation of true learning, leading to corruption. Now, we are reaping the results of this corruption in everyday applications, such as we experienced, world wide. The influence on government Public Policy by fake Science was devastating on Humanity, civilization.

[@paulwong9819]

Love honest and ethical people in any fields. It becomes a rarity now away. Thank you for your report.

[@kennethlane3896]

A little light bulb goes off whenever I hear someone say "I've been doing this for 15, 20 ...years". I have worked with individuals for 21 years who should not even be in the same workplace.

[@handynothandsome261]

*There should be an award given, that **_every_** researcher should (and might) aspire to, if Dr. Bix were to find and make note of research that DOESN’T have any plagiarism, image duplication, failure to credit quotes, etc.* *I suspect those are the rare exceptions these days, and they ought to be lauded.*

[@peterkilvert2712]

It just reminded me of a situation that happened in the 1990s in Queensland Australia. A 13 year old girl died of Toxic Shock Syndrome caused by the tampon she was using. The Pathologist ruled that she died of myocarditis and showed photographs of 80 focals in her heart. On closer investigation these 80 photographs were of only 2 focals, photographed from 40 x 2 positions. As usual the tampon manufacturer got away with murder.

[@nancismith7705]

God will take care of the manufacturer and then the manufacturer will have wished the legal system had taken care of it! Hell is forever!

[@GentlemanH]

Science is the study of facts and it is unfortunate that one can no longer rely on the scientists to present the facts. I am indeed reassured that Dr. Elizabeth Bik is looking into this situation and hopefully those who are guilty will be dealt with.

[@Raymond-rr5iv]

What an amazing observational talent this woman has !! My sister is gifted similarly as an artist. She took 36 rolls of film of the statue of David. She could pick four leaf clovers out of a sea of clovers in a matter of minutes... while I would not be able to pick out a single one. God bless her for the good that she does. I found your program very interesting and I subscribe to it also.

[@StatedCasually]

Thanks for doing these! Not that I expect you to take requests, but I'd love to learn more about policing in general in science. What systems are in place? And I'd like to hear about corruption from industry in science. We've all heard that science around tobacco's link to cancer was messed with by cigarette companies, we've heard oil companies have tried messing with climate research. How does that type of scientific fraud work? How is industry manipulation being policed?

[@alihenderson5910]

You are part of the problem. You just believe the old trope you've 'heard' about the 'oil companies'. They are owned by the same people who 'own' the IPCC.

[@frednewman2162]

Pete, awesome interview to get her technique on doing this! Now if we could get someone like her to do something similar in engineering professions, on their designs and structural analysis.

[@chrishartz2397]

Typical for Stanford and Harvard…