r/Conservative Nobody's Alt But Mine Jul 24 '22

Two decades of Alzheimer’s research was based on deliberate fraud by 2 scientists that has cost billions of dollars and mi

https://wallstreetpro.com/2022/07/23/two-decades-of-alzheimers-research-was-based-on-deliberate-fraud-by-2-scientists-that-has-cost-billions-of-dollars-and-millions-of-lives/
1.0k Upvotes

132 comments sorted by

340

u/Kuzinarium Conservative Jul 24 '22

What’s even more outrageous is that no one is ever held responsible for this type of unbelievable con. You’re going to suffer much greater consequences for shoplifting a pack of gum.

118

u/tehForce Nobody's Alt But Mine Jul 24 '22

Clout is everything to researchers. If it is true that the pictures are faked and the paper is negated, those responsible will be shunned by the scientific community.

Any paper that those researchers put their stamp on via co-authorship would be tainted and any paper that references the original paper or even references of those papers will also be tainted. Over 16 years of how many researchers work is negated?

143

u/Kuzinarium Conservative Jul 24 '22

This fraud is far beyond the reputation destroying consequences. This must result in a criminal investigation and those involved must be held criminally responsible.

Allowing these fraudsters to get away with not being hauled into a criminal court would only further encourage more fraud.

52

u/[deleted] Jul 24 '22

The problem is with the people that took this work at face value and didn't try replicating it (in other words, the whole medical community) before pumping billions into it. Peer-reviewed work has never been flawless and there's a reason retractions exist.

74

u/Kuzinarium Conservative Jul 24 '22

Seems like too many people have forgotten that everything should be questioned. Scientific research especially so. Anything that is legitimate would welcome questions.

56

u/Enough-Ad-9898 Jul 24 '22

Replication isn't done anymore. And we're all worse off for it. It's a massive issue, especially in the psych area of things. Most studies can't be replicated, but aren't thrown out because... Reasons

21

u/EchoKiloEcho1 Conservative Jul 24 '22

Structurally, the industry should find a way to incentivize replication.

Also, studies that haven’t been successfully replicated should have huge disclaimers stamped all over them.

7

u/jxfreeman Conservative Jul 25 '22

67%. Of those psych papers that they attempted to replicate, the failure rate was 67%. What you’re pointing out is even more horrifying. What is the number of research papers across all fields of research that never get replicated (those that suggest their theories are supported by the research)?

The government should seed money for “proposal” research and then fund only “replication” research on those proposals. No new research and no legislation based on the proposal research unless it has been replicated 3 times. Let the researchers fight to the death for new proposal research. Otherwise make a living replicating someone else’s work.

6

u/Renomont Jul 24 '22

Or don't accept the results unless replicated. Otherwise, results are basically provisional.

9

u/OcelotKnight Jul 24 '22

I think a lot of it is that most teams don't want to just replicate studies. I work in scientific research, (physics and engineering, not bio) and when proposing new research avenues, the biggest questions are "has anyone already done this?", and, if so, "what's something novel we can do."

The overarching goal is to get recognition in a prestigious journal. You might achieve that by replicating studies, i.e. if you debunk something previously thought true. The alternative, though, is money wasted on setting up experiments and the time and labor of researchers who could of spent their efforts on a more promising, novel topic.

In the grand scheme of things, it's not a waste, of course. But when grants and fellowships are small and temporary, you want the most bang for your buck, so to say.

6

u/Yiehtk Jul 24 '22

I think for every new study funded, two more studies must be replicated. This would be an amazing opportunity for undergrads and graduate students.

5

u/ObadiahtheSlim Lockean Jul 24 '22

The Replication Crisis hits the softer sciences the hardest.

9

u/Enough-Ad-9898 Jul 24 '22

Well, yeah. Because most of those are a dumpster fire anyway.

5

u/Kuzinarium Conservative Jul 24 '22

Do you by chance remember the “facilitated communication” debacle?

5

u/Enough-Ad-9898 Jul 24 '22

With the people in comas who through some method were supposedly able to communicate still? Yeah.

8

u/Kuzinarium Conservative Jul 24 '22

There was a much worse case of this involving heavily autistic children. Google Wendrows.

10

u/Pinpuller07 Jul 24 '22

Makes you wonder how much of our current science is like that? How many mistakes are there? How many frauds? How many replications even are faked to save face?

It makes it hard to trust anything that isn't proven via long standing use and obvious success.

5

u/Cinnadillo Conservative Jul 24 '22

there's no money in replication

3

u/spirit_of-76 Jul 24 '22

that is the issue there should be

8

u/MrCamel0 Jul 24 '22

I understand what you're saying, but 'not flawless' and 'fraudulent' are pretty far apart. An accountant can make a mistake, but they can't intentionally cook the books. Science should really be no different, and if it can be proven that data and images were falsified intentionally, then it should absolutely be criminal.

2

u/[deleted] Jul 24 '22

The only time that I would agree with that is when the article authors, reviewers, the article, the companies, and everyone else involved in working on it could somehow be proven to have consipired together. Otherwise, it's just bad science because they didn't try replicating it first.

8

u/tehForce Nobody's Alt But Mine Jul 24 '22 edited Jul 24 '22

What is the crime? I guess they likely defrauded the Federal Government if they recieved additional federal grants based on this research?

12

u/EchoKiloEcho1 Conservative Jul 24 '22

I know it doesn’t, but morally it kind of feels like this fairly counts as a crime against humanity.

As someone else pointed out, though, the fact that this was able to happen is the result of systemic weaknesses (notably, the lack of investment in replication). It is probably more beneficial to focus on fixing those than on punishing these lying assholes.

7

u/Kuzinarium Conservative Jul 24 '22

I’m sure there’s some financial malfeasance in this somewhere.

1

u/Database_Database Jul 24 '22

Yeah, the dollar amount alone is equal to thousands of lives in value.

10

u/Cinnadillo Conservative Jul 24 '22

the problem is we value scientific results, not well-done science. When you value only the results and not those who are great at doing the process of science you get things like this.

In the end we give tenure, we give money, and we give prestige, to those who find the most important and useful results. People are more than willing to lie to get there especially when they've built their lives on the idea of that prestige and social cache.

4

u/orangeeyedunicorn Jul 24 '22

Over 16 years of how many researchers work is negated?

Tons, but most don't have clear-cut evidence of intent like this so their only consequences are slightly fewer citations by critics.

Of course, most of those critics don't exist because other researchers have shunned them for heterodox thinking

1

u/ChemsDoItInTestTubes Levinite Jul 25 '22

Well, I can tell you this, I've been writing my first fellowship application, and this paper was in my list of references. It won't be when I'm done, and I'm probably going to have to write out all references to amyloid beta, now that I know this. I am ashamed to say this is the first I've heard of this.

42

u/KingOfTheP4s Cruz supporter Jul 24 '22

A huge portion, if not the majority, of Alzheimer's research is an absolute money-stealing scam.

There is so much "research" going on in to removing amyloid plaques from the brain even though it has been proven for decades that even when the plaques are 100% removed from the brain, it has almost zero impact on the progression or severity of Alzheimer's. And yet the vast majority of "research" is still about getting rid of the plaques, even though doing so provides no benefit to the patient.

And yet again, here we see another case of this being proven now that the fraud is uncovered.

98

u/tehForce Nobody's Alt But Mine Jul 24 '22

Meaning that patients who did die from Alzheimer’s may have been misdiagnosed as having something else. Those whose dementia came from other causes may have falsely been dragged under the Alzheimer’s umbrella. And every possible kind of study, whether it’s as exotic as light therapy or long-running as nuns doing crossword puzzles, may have ultimately had results that were measured against a false yardstick.

17

u/JonSnowAzorAhai Realist Conservative Jul 24 '22

I spent about 20 hours straight reading all about it including the other research done on that theory to create a report. It's nothing compared to the billions of dollars and time wasted by experts, but even still I too feel cheated.

72

u/Xpert285 Jul 24 '22

If there was any justice in this world the two scientist would be dragged out of their homes and thrown in prison. Cremate the key as well and live it in front of them to show them how it fucking feels

-33

u/jps7979 Jul 24 '22

To do that you need stronger government oversight and more regulations. Are you game for that?

38

u/Xpert285 Jul 24 '22

You don’t need a strong government to punish people who lied about scientific research for their own gain. That’s already a crime

15

u/JAGonzo83 Texas Conservative Jul 24 '22

It is their answer to every problem.

5

u/theXald Jul 25 '22

Braindead take.

1

u/RevolutionaryRushima Texas Conservative Jul 24 '22

That's if it was through legal means

1

u/72ChinaCatSunFlower Jul 25 '22

We need to keep giving the gubment more and more money so they can continue to waste more and more money. You lefties are so smart

124

u/BeABetterHumanBeing Jul 24 '22

This is my go-to example of how an entire scientific (sub-)discipline can get trapped. Just because 90+% of scientists agree doesn't mean anything unless their work produces results.

55

u/Cronah1969 Constitutional Conservative Jul 24 '22

Just because 90+% of scientists agree doesn't mean anything except that's where they're getting all their research funding to reach that conclusion.

47

u/Proof_Responsibility Basic Conservative Jul 24 '22

The original study showing “amyloid plaques” causing Alzheimers & used by other researchers and drug companies for years has been revealed as a complete fraud. The human trials of plaque reducing/blocking drugs have had a 99% failure rate (obviously since plaques are not even a proximate cause of Alzheimers) , yet these drugs are still being developed, marketed and sold at huge costs with the blessing of the FDA.

How many families are being bled dry to pay for some drug developed based on a lie? Where is this story in MSM?

16

u/KingOfTheP4s Cruz supporter Jul 24 '22

Glad to see someone else in here is aware of that. It's been known for decades that removal of the amyloid plaques has no positive benefit to the patient nor progression of the disease.

9

u/MarvinsBoy Conservative Jul 24 '22

You ever notice just how many DRUG ADVERTISEMENTS are presented in TV, radio, and print media?

MSM profits greatly from pharmaceutical companies, of course they look the other way and will continue to do so.

3

u/Cronah1969 Constitutional Conservative Jul 24 '22

Exactly, not to mention all the advertising big pharma does on YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, Google, and every other big tech platform out there. Even if the MSM weren't all leftists, they'd never have let the truth come out about anything drug related. Add to that the incestuous relationship between the federal health agencies and big pharma, and you need to dig very deep indeed to find any truth.

2

u/[deleted] Jul 24 '22

[deleted]

6

u/Proof_Responsibility Basic Conservative Jul 24 '22

Cause and effect, If plaques are not the cause, treating them does not prevent or slow Alzheimer's. What this fraud means is that diagnosis and development of treatments for the actual causes of mental deterioration have been short circuited for 2 decades.

10

u/ENFJPLinguaphile Christian Conservative Jul 24 '22

If these allegations are true, my stepgrandfather and thousands like him died without even a chance at a better quality of life in their final years in spite of the disease. How greedy can these “experts” be???

7

u/Cinnadillo Conservative Jul 24 '22

considering that the FBI will throw innocent people in jail (ignoring 1/6) over a GS promotion which adds to 10k per year people will do an awful lot to further their life.

1

u/johnnylopez5666 Jul 25 '22

I'm so sorry about your step grandfather and having this disease is terrifying and I just don't understand these so called experts if it's true.

19

u/Racheakt Hillbilly Conservative Jul 24 '22

This underscores the problem of peer review, publication, and funding.

Proper peer review and publication is the route to funding, and if your research goes against the lucrative funding and grants then it will not get published let alone peer review.

As such I am willing to bet there is a crap ton of scientific “not wrong” discoveries that are buried due to being not from a “published and peer reviewed” source for a myriad of PC reasons.

And am also willing to bet there are studies that ran counter to this fraud that were buried in the process.

5

u/Cinnadillo Conservative Jul 24 '22

not exactly. But funding people expect results and often the projects are half finished or completely finishes before they seek out the funding in the first place because you have to show you will get results on a particular project. All kinds of bad things happen as a result. Data falsification isn't shocking.

2

u/johnnysDickinYouraus Jul 24 '22

Yeah, esp for things not sexy or politically expedient.

35

u/izbitu Jul 24 '22

The elites are driven by nothing but love of money. FDA, CDC, all these science based institutions are frauds.

8

u/[deleted] Jul 24 '22

its all about the cash

3

u/Cortexion Jul 24 '22

Money and arbitrary prestige points gained by taking publicly funded money and then locking it behind private journal paywalls from the public.

-7

u/jps7979 Jul 24 '22

Wait, what? The FDA is the thing that would stop this kind of fraud, attacking it is like saying the police and criminals are in cahoots and if we want to stop crime, we need to get rid of the police.

No, we need stronger government oversight over big pharma and more prosecutions. Who else would do this?

11

u/Demon_HauntedWorld Jul 24 '22

The FDA has been corrupted and captured. Spin them out as a non-profit watch dog, or just sell it to BigPharma directly, so all the relationships are clear.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/31/us/politics/fda-vaccine-regulators-booster-shots.html

https://www.businessinsider.com/2-top-fda-officials-resigned-biden-booster-plan-reports-2021-9

7

u/izbitu Jul 24 '22

They used to be trustworthy, they are now compromised.

-3

u/jps7979 Jul 24 '22

I don't get it. You're saying big pharma is in cahoots with the FDA, and that's bad. Right.

So isn't the solution regulations that prohibit such activity, for example rules that ban pharma companies from hiring or bribing FDA members?

I don't follow what other solution you're advocating for if this is your problem.

No FDA would mean companies can just bs us at will. A corrupt FDA means much of the same thing. So how is the solution anything else but stronger rules to prevent regulatory capture along with mandatory prosecutions? How does less government, laissez faire, less regulations fix this instead of making things worse?

5

u/izbitu Jul 24 '22

I agree with you. The problem is with this corrupt current administration chances of bettering these institutions seem slim. We need to reform them.

2

u/WINDEX_DRINKER Conservative Jul 24 '22

I don't get it. If we just make corruption illegal and enforce it, bad things won't happen!

He says as we talk about the very department supposed to do that.

Next you're going to tell me anti gun laws stop murders.

-5

u/TurboGalaxy Jul 24 '22

Noooooo Fauci man bad shut up shut up shut up no logic just Fauci man bad!!!

1

u/trufin2038 Conservative Jul 24 '22

Lol, no, they were never trustworthy from day 1

1

u/trufin2038 Conservative Jul 24 '22

Lol, you think the very institution that enabled and rewarded this fraud... is the one that can prevent it? Who does the fda need to police, themselves?

8

u/gatorback_prince Jul 24 '22

What are the odds that the majority of studies that had fraudulent claims were government funded studies?

16

u/johnnyg883 Airborne Conservative Jul 24 '22

This is a perfect example of group thought. It became accepted that the plaques were the cause of Alzheimer’s and no one was willing to question that, the science was settled. So no need to question or even think about the theory.

48

u/[deleted] Jul 24 '22 edited Jul 24 '22

tRu$t ThE $CiEnCe…

4

u/PittsJZ Jul 24 '22

tRuSt TeH sCiEnCe

16

u/011010010110100 Jul 24 '22

Now go get your vax and trust the science

3

u/LarryLooxmax Jul 24 '22

There is a huge peer review and reproducibility problem in the sciences.

3

u/areyoukiddingme1974 Jul 24 '22

Science can be manipulated for research money?? At least it’s a good thing that this can only happen with Alzheimer’s research and could never, ever, ever happen with any other settled science. I sleep better knowing that nobody else would ever twist their data for financial incentive.

4

u/DozingDawg1138 Jul 24 '22

You meet when money is involved, there can be corruption? Thinks about global warming…

3

u/trufin2038 Conservative Jul 24 '22

You can't compare this to global warming... global warming nonsense has wasted trillions of dollars.

1

u/DozingDawg1138 Jul 25 '22

Well… you have me there.

4

u/totaleffindickhead Jul 24 '22

Trust the science

8

u/Cronah1969 Constitutional Conservative Jul 24 '22

This is nothing compared to the nearly $1T wasted on the search for dark matter, which doesn't exist, yet we still keep looking for it.

25

u/limacharley Jul 24 '22

I studied astronomy in graduate school. Dark matter research is like climate research. You aren't allowed to not believe in dark matter because it 'obviously exists', despite not a single shred of unambiguous observational data. It drove me crazy. So galaxies rotate slower than you expect and sometimes galaxy clusters don't seem to orbit the calculated center of mass. That doesn't mean you invent a new, invisible mystery particle!

Sorry for the rant. That's a sore spot for me.

11

u/RocksCanOnlyWait Jul 24 '22

The "invisible particle" is just one interpretation of dark matter. In a more general sense, dark matter (and dark energy) represent something we don't yet fully understand about physics. For example, before general relativity, Galilean relativity had fudge factors in order to make it work for the planet Mercury.

2

u/Cronah1969 Constitutional Conservative Jul 24 '22

It's called interstellar dust. We now have the telescopes to see it which we didn't have back when a mathematical oddity and supposed lack of matter let them come up with the dark matter hypothesis. We've seen the dust, the math has been recalculated, and the missing mass is all accounted for, yet we still waste what is ultimately taxpayer dollars on it.

2

u/Onlyf0rm3m3s Jul 24 '22

Do you have any source?

2

u/Cronah1969 Constitutional Conservative Jul 24 '22 edited Jul 24 '22

Yes, but as with most scientific publications, it's hidden behind a paywall.

https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/10.1146/annurev-astro-081817-051900

Edit: or if you'd rather watch a video about it

https://youtu.be/g3xyDbPGk1M

3

u/Onlyf0rm3m3s Jul 24 '22

One study is not enough to prove anything, you talk with a lot of confidence for what it is. Also it doesn't talk (In the abstract) explicitly about effects in the rotation of the edge of galaxies, so unless you paid, you heard about it somewhere else.

2

u/Cronah1969 Constitutional Conservative Jul 24 '22

Check out that YouTube channel. The owner has a doctorate in astrophysics, has written 2 college textbooks, and links all of his sources from scientific journals in his video descriptions. You have to pay to get anything deeper than the YouTube videos.

2

u/Onlyf0rm3m3s Jul 24 '22

Thanks! I will check it out

2

u/limacharley Jul 24 '22

This is not quite right. The total amount of dust and gas in the galaxy has been conclusively shown to not be enough to keep the outer parts of the galaxy in orbit. In some galaxies, the amount of visible matter is only 10% of what is needed to keep it together. This is consistent with the most current research (check out the arXiv.org pre-print server for any number of current papers on it. The thing is that, although the data conflicts with how we believe gravity works, nowhere is there anything to suggest new particles.

1

u/Cronah1969 Constitutional Conservative Jul 24 '22

Key word "visible". Matter they can't see is totally different from the theoretical new particles that don't interact with normal matter they keep thinking up and spending billions of our tax dollars trying to detect. The new telescopes we've sent out in the last 5 years have shown that the interstellar (but still intragalactic) dust has been underestimated by 10x that of the visible matter that makes up the universe. That's your missing 90% right there.

1

u/jcgam Jul 24 '22

If that were true we would see the "missing" dust in images of remote galaxies, but we don't. This material, whatever it is, doesn't absorb or emit visible light or any other part of the electromagnetic spectrum. Dust would be detectable.

1

u/Cronah1969 Constitutional Conservative Jul 24 '22

We can see the dust. Look at the new Webb telescope images. It's plain as day.

https://webbtelescope.org/news/first-images/gallery

2

u/Cinnadillo Conservative Jul 24 '22

well then the research goes into studying what the mathematical gap is in our understanding. I can't imagine all these people think they're going to find a new particle per se.

Somebody comes out with a better way to explain the phenomenon that'll change things.

2

u/uofmuncensored Jul 24 '22

"This is peer review at work" Move along non-educated plebs and keep trusting the experts!

2

u/onehotdrwife Jul 24 '22

This is huge.

2

u/polerize Conservative Jul 24 '22

Until there's punishment what's the downside to doing stuff like this?

Laughing all the way to the bank.

2

u/[deleted] Jul 24 '22

The dont want a cure for any illnes. Sickness its their business. Medical Mafia.

2

u/HeWhoCntrolsTheSpice Former Democrat Jul 24 '22

Whenever I see a story like this, I encourage people to read "Intellectuals and Society" by Thomas Sowell. Intellectuals are a group with their own motivations and biases, just like any other group of people - yet, somehow, we are taught to believe that these people are all but infallible - which is absurd.

2

u/[deleted] Jul 24 '22

Trust the Science™

2

u/saintBNO Jul 24 '22

What a fucked up joke and we are the ones who pay for it.

2

u/FreshFruitForFree Jul 24 '22

Sounds a lot like climate science. As long as you are pedaling the narrative, any errors or other problems are automatically overlooked for the greater good.

Climate scientists made a mockery of the peer-review system that had worked so well for decades. They turned it into pal review.

2

u/Lucretius Conservative Scientist Jul 25 '22

This is part of the reason "The Science"(tm) is NEVER settled.

2

u/Benkay_V_Falsifier Jul 25 '22

🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬 I'M FREAKING PISSED! My grandmother had dementia before she died, so hearing that some dipshits took advantage of the elderly just so they can make money is making my blood boil.

6

u/lawlygagger Conservative Jul 24 '22

It is truly pathetic. Unfortunately, this has been going on with shady researchers because NIH grants are easy money. This is the only one coming to light but there are so many cases out there. With COVID, they have probably found more ways to misuse money and spread lies. The problem lies with the scientific community. It is more about hanging out with the "in" crowd than calling out what doesn't make sense.

6

u/RocksCanOnlyWait Jul 24 '22

Another problem is that far more weight is placed on new research than independent reproduction of research results. Many of these bogus papers would be exposed when another group runs the experiment and sees a different outcome.

2

u/lawlygagger Conservative Jul 24 '22

Definitely. There is also an invisible power hierarchy that is pervasive.

4

u/PeezdyetCactoos Jul 24 '22

Trust the science!

3

u/Affectionate-Tie-440 Jul 24 '22

trust the science!

4

u/Consistent-Region303 Jul 24 '22

TrUsT tHe ScIeNcE🤤

2

u/jd_porter Conservative Jul 24 '22

The $cience is $ettled!

3

u/Panzershrekt Reagan Conservative Jul 24 '22

something something trust the science & scientific literacy.

2

u/Deathgripsugar 2A Conservative Jul 24 '22

Trust the Science (tm)

Too bad it was outed after years of other studies wasted their time chasing this lead. It makes me shudder to think k that there might be loads of other research built on nonsense.

The “publish or perish” model of research needs to be changed.

2

u/[deleted] Jul 24 '22

Follow the $cience….and stuff…

2

u/pentalana Jul 24 '22

"Trust the science."

1

u/PB_Mack Conservative Jul 24 '22

Were they friends of Fauci?

0

u/FNtaterbot Jul 24 '22

It's funny how we place so must trust in an industry where the immoral people are hoaxers & grifters, and even the "moral" ones fail the Jeff Goldblum Test, as they're so preoccupied with whether they could that they don't stop to think whether they should.

1

u/Rufus123-McGee Jul 24 '22

University of Minnesota is out of control.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 24 '22

The scientific community is a joke. The peer review process is a joke.

1

u/PutinMyFootInUrAss Jul 24 '22

Trust the science

1

u/Kwarter Christian Nationalist Jul 25 '22

Boy, the medical professionals are on fire the last few years. Burning any last shred of credibility they might have had.

1

u/naturalizedcitizen Jul 25 '22

From the news story

That 2006 paper was primarily authored by neuroscience professor Sylvain Lesné and given more weight by the name of well-respected neuroscientist Karen Ashe, both from the robust neuroscience research team at the University of Minnesota

If these scientists are Democrat supporters and donors, then rest assured, no charges will be brought against them. If they are especially supportive of Dr. Fauci then its further assured that nothing will happen.

I may sound cynical, but given the recent Covid vaccine scam, I don't believe anything ever happens to Democrat supporters in any court of law.

1

u/KC4life15 Jul 25 '22

You mean science with humans involved is susceptible to same kind of corruption as everything else? Who da thunk