A few months later, he was surprised to find that most of the academic papers that looked unusual were fabricated. The authors of the papers included China Academy of Engineering, Li, Dean of College of Pharmacy, Zhejiang University, a famous pharmacologist of traditional Chinese medicine, Wu, director of Pharmacology Laboratory of College of Pharmacy, Zhejiang University, and the main members of the research group. At the end of last year 10, Professor Zhu Guoguang, the vice chairman of the All-European Federation of Chinese Medicine Societies living in the Netherlands, saw the news that He Haibo, a postdoctoral fellow in the College of Traditional Chinese Medicine of Zhejiang University, had faked his papers on the Internet, and then collected a series of academic papers related to He Haibo on the Internet, and found that these papers published in top international academic journals all had obvious traces of falsification.
Let's take a look at the mystery of this group of articles-in May 2008, the German magazine NSA Pharmacology published an article entitled "Comparison of the Protective Effects of Salvianolic Acid B and Belopril on Chronic Myocardial Infarction in Mice". Why is the author Haibo (He Haibo), the first author? Other authors include Wu (Wu) and Li (Li), with Wu presided over by Li.
According to the experimental process disclosed in this paper, the research team performed thoracotomy on mice, artificially causing myocardial infarction in mice. Then, these mice were divided into several groups, taking Chinese medicine B (salvianolic acid B) and western medicine Benazepril for several weeks respectively, and collecting pharmacological experimental data and pathological sections. The experimental results show that salvianolic acid B and bepril have the same pharmacological effects on myocardial infarction.
For the academic circle of traditional Chinese medicine, the pharmaceutical theory revealed in this article is exciting, especially in western countries, which greatly improves the status of traditional Chinese medicine, which has been criticized for a long time.
Unexpectedly, this article appeared "by mistake" because of the publication of another article entitled "Comparison of the cardioprotective effects of salvianolic acid B and bepril on large-scale myocardial infarction in mice" published in Volume 60 of Polish Pharmacological Bulletin in 2008, written by six people, including Wu Limao and Li Lianda. The process and purpose of the experiment are the same as those reflected in the above article. The only difference is that the former is aimed at chronic myocardial infarction and the latter is aimed at acute myocardial infarction. However, the experimental data of two completely different experiments are highly consistent.
"It is absolutely impossible for mice to get the same data in two different experiments at different doses and at different times." Zhu Guoguang analyzed this newspaper and said, "Either only one experiment was done, and one paper copied the data of another paper intact; Or both are fake. At least one of them is fake. "
In a written interview with our reporter, Professor Martin C. Michel, editor-in-chief of Pharmacology magazine of the National Security Agency of the United States, and Professor Vardis Lao Larsen, editor-in-chief of Pharmacology Bulletin, said, "Plagiarism and multiple contributions are very serious problems and should be dealt with seriously. Therefore, we revoke the plagiarized articles published by He Haibo and others in our magazine. "
Further investigation, Zhu Guoguang also found that in March 2008, the Dutch Journal of Ethnology published an article entitled "Cardioprotective Effect of Salvianolic Acid B on Rats with Large Area Myocardial Infarction", which was jointly signed by seven people, including,, Wu and Li, and independently demonstrated the pharmacological effect of Salvianolic Acid B on myocardial infarction. But this paper is also false, and its data are completely cloned from the above two papers published in NSA Pharmacology and Pharmacology Bulletin with He Haibo as the first author.
Professor Rob Verpoorte, director of the Department of Biology at Leiden University in the Netherlands and editor-in-chief of Ethnological Pharmacology, wrote back to our reporter that the paper had been revoked and had made representations to Zhejiang University.
In addition, in March 2008, seven people, including Wu and Li, jointly published an article in the British Journal of Herbal Therapy, and the data used were almost completely transplanted to the data in the above three articles.
After discovering the false facts of this paper, herbal therapy research cancelled it. Professor Elizabeth, the editor-in-chief, told this reporter: "The author used the data of other scientists, and the measure we took was to cancel this article. We are very serious about this incident because it is a scientific fraud. " The above-mentioned series of academic misconduct was uncovered, originally from a letter from Professor Dai Dezai of China Pharmaceutical University. From June 5, 2008 to 2008 10, Professor Dai wrote to the editor-in-chief of Materia Medica Research, pointing out why the article titled Pharmacological Experiment of Myocardial Infarction in Mice by Hai Bo, Wu, Li et al. published in Volume 22, 2008 was a copy of the related papers published by his research group in the International Journal of Cardiology. Dai Dezai is a doctoral supervisor in He Haibo.
Subsequently, the editors-in-chief of Materia Medica Research and International Cardiology issued a joint statement that He Haibo and others plagiarized other people's research results as "scientific fraud" and decided to withdraw the paper.
Dai Dezai's exposure letter seems to have knocked down the "domino" and made a series of academic misconduct of Li's research group surface. In May 2008, Pharmacy and Pharmacology and Leukemia and Lymphoma published two articles with similar titles.
One of these two articles is about leukemia cell HL-60 and the other is about leukemia cell K562. The data of two articles on pharmacological experiments on different cells are the same even after the decimal point. Obviously, at least one of the two articles is false.
According to the survey, the first author of these two articles is Niu Luoping, an associate professor of Zhejiang University of Technology, a doctoral student of Li Dai and a member of the research group. The other two authors are Wu and Li.
In addition to publicly fabricating experimental data, Li's research group also recorded many contributions, including "exporting papers published abroad to the domestic market", which was published in China academic media again. According to the general rules of academic circles, plagiarism, forgery, and multiple submissions are all academic misconduct.
I don't know for what reason, the signature forms of these papers suspected of academic misconduct, mainly with He Haibo as the first author, are constantly changing. Take Li as an example. When his name appeared in foreign academic journals, there were the following spellings: Li, Li Dalian, Li Dalian, Li De and so on. Researchers such as Dr. Wu, director of the laboratory of his research group, have similar signature forms.
A scholar who is familiar with the inside story thinks that if academic papers from the same research group fabricate experimental data or copy an experiment into several papers, then only by retrieving all these papers and comparing them can we find out the problem. With this dazzling signature, you can avoid searching on Pubmed (the world's largest scientific paper database of the National Library of America).
According to Zhu Guoguang's statistics, up to now, Li's research group has found 14 papers related to academic misconduct, such as paper fraud and multiple submissions. Zhu Guoguang was appointed by the All-Europe Federation of Chinese Medicine Societies to return to China to crack down on serious academic misconduct at his alma mater (Zhu Guoguang graduated from Zhejiang University), and sent a signed tip-off letter to the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of Science and Technology, the China Academy of Engineering, the National Natural Science Foundation of China, the Chinese Academy of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Zhejiang University and other institutions, but Zhu said that so far, only the China Academy of Engineering said that it had received the report and was putting it on file for investigation. Yang Wei, president of Zhejiang University, called Zhu Guoguang twice, saying that "He Haibo made the fraud himself, not Academician Li".
So, what is the motivation for this large-scale academic paper fraud? Is it He Haibo's personal behavior or Li's collective fraud?
According to the reporter's investigation, the source and quantity of scientific research funds are indicated in the above dozens of papers, including the National 973 Plan, the National Natural Science Foundation, the National Postdoctoral Fund, and local project funds such as Zhejiang Education Department, Science and Technology Department and Chinese Medicine Bureau. Since most of the papers are fabricated, it means that Li's research group has never engaged in relevant experiments at all. How are the publicly listed project funds used?
As for the reputation gained by publishing articles in international academic journals, it is also an indisputable fact. According to a recent report, Zhejiang University won the academic achievements of SCI (Scientific Citation Index Database, universities and other research institutions) in 2008, and Tsinghua, China became the first doctoral preparatory school in the United States. Have scores of many fake papers been eliminated?
Faced with doubts, on February 2, last year, at 65438, Yang Wei, president of Zhejiang University, wrote to the editor-in-chief of NSA Pharmacology and Materia Medica Research, admitting that He Haibo not only contributed two articles, but also "we found that other papers he published in the past were deceptive". However, the principal said that this was only He's personal behavior, and he himself admitted that other authors did not know. Accordingly, Zhejiang University dismissed He Haibo in June165438+1October 65438+March last year.
65438+ 10/3, Zhejiang University sent a statement to our reporter: "During He Haibo's postdoctoral research in Zhejiang University, there were some academic misconduct, such as plagiarism, two manuscripts, unauthorized signature of other people's names, unauthorized funding, fabricating well-known experts to help modify English, etc."
The "Description" said: "The falsification of the paper is mainly the personal behavior of He Haibo, a postdoctoral fellow brought by Academician Li, and other authors are unaware of it." "These foreign periodicals are not published, but rented." Relevant persons said that this is only a preliminary conclusion and the school is still investigating.
Professor Zhu Guoguang raised six questions about the investigation conclusion of Zhejiang University. First, so many papers have been published in internationally renowned academic journals, why has no member of the research group raised any objection to the signature so far? Secondly, the scientific research design, ideas, experimental methods and projects embodied in the paper are all high-level, and the English level is also very good, not just from postdocs; Third, publish papers in European academic journals, with a price of 300 to 500 euros per page. Roughly speaking, a dozen papers cost 30 thousand to 50 thousand, which He Haibo can't do. Fourth, papers usually have to be revised many times from mailing to official publication. Judging from the fact that all the correspondence contacts of the paper are laboratory director Wu, it is unconvincing to think that He Haibo is good at signing others while other authors don't know. Fifth, Ma Yuling, a China scholar at the University of Reading in the United Kingdom, confirmed in writing to Professor Maria, editor-in-chief of Materia Medica Research, that in early 2007, her teacher Li introduced Wu and others to her, hoping to help them; Sixth, the paper has been officially published, with specific publication date, serial number and page number. How can we say that they are not published?
Professor Zhu Guoguang has now returned to Finland. Zhu told reporters that in addition to the above-mentioned 14 paper, he and other scholars have recently discovered other related papers of Li's research group suspected of fraud, and will take further action.
The scholar relayed the appeal of the All-European Federation of Chinese Medicine Associations: whether it is He Haibo's personal behavior or organized fraud, an independent investigation agency should be set up to thoroughly find out the truth.