adssx
#41
Found on Twitter, don’t know the source: x.com
(poke @ng0rge)
1 Like
ng0rge
#42
I certainly don’t doubt all the problems with Chinese research and papers published in journals. But I would like to see a more complete analysis of ALL Chinese research including all the best labs and researchers and any leading edge research and discoveries in the medical field. Then, most importantly since it’s a big problem, a focus on rating Chinese medical research to weed out the bad or at least flag it. This would be useful to the whole medical community as well as us.
1 Like
I’m going to give papers from Japan a credibility value of 1.2X and the UK 1.1X. 
Jonas
#44
Name one blockbuster drug from China in the past 20 years during which their research papers and publications skyrocketed to #1
5 Likes
Exactly. Maybe I should give Chinese papers a .01X weighting.
1 Like
On the general issue of “Journal Quality”
MDPI, Frontiers and Hindawi journals may be downgraded in Finland
https://osf.io/23zcr
3 Likes
More fraud - Cancer specialist faked data in at least ten papers, VA and UCLA find:
“ Lichtenstein has received more than $10 million in funding from the National Institutes of Health, and was also previously a professor of medicine in residence at UCLA Medical School[…]”
And this is why the establishment is a joke:
“ The VA banned Lichtenstein from conducting research for the department for at least two years, and called for notifying the journals where the tainted articles appeared of the misconduct findings.”
So you commit malfeasance and fraud to the tune of $10 million and fake studies for years, and your punishment is to suspend your right to do studies at a particular institution for two years??
Why are you not in prison or at least banned from all research for life?
7 Likes
Shoddy commentaries—a quick and dirty route to higher impact numbers—are on the rise
AI-generated content floods literature with poor-quality publications, casts doubt on metrics, Scienceand Retraction Watch investigation finds
On 22 October, an unusual editorial appeared in the journal Neurosurgical Review. “We have made the difficult decision to temporarily pause the acceptance of letters to the editor and commentary manuscripts,” wrote Editor-in-Chief Daniel Prevedello, a brain surgeon at Ohio State University. The publication had been knocked off its feet by an “unprecedented increase” in submitted commentaries that appeared to be “driven by” advances in artificial intelligence (AI) tools such as ChatGPT, he explained.
Neurosurgical Review is not the only journal overwhelmed by commentary articles, a joint investigation by Science and Retraction Watch finds. They now make up 70% of the content in Elsevier’s Oral Oncology Reports, and nearly half in Wolters Kluwer’s International Journal of Surgery Open. At Neurosurgical Review, a Springer Nature title, letters, comments, and editorials comprised 58% of the total output from January to October—up from 9% last year. More than 80% of these commentaries are from South Asian countries, compared with fewer than 20% of research and review articles.
https://www.science.org/content/article/shoddy-commentaries-quick-and-dirty-route-higher-impact-numbers-are-rise
2 Likes
Get ready for a tsunami of crap papers…
4 Likes
Maybe we need to give less credence to papers created in 2025 and beyond.
3 Likes
Fake papers, and fake drugs:
Public anger in China over concerns raised by doctors that generic drugs used in public hospitals are increasingly ineffective has led to a rare response from the government.
Doctors say they believe the country’s drug procurement system, which incentivises the use of cheap generic drugs over original brand-name pharmaceuticals, has led to costs being cut at the expense of people’s safety.
But officials, quoted by multiple state media outlets on Sunday, say the issue is one of perception rather than reality.
One report said different people simply had different reactions to medicines and that claims about them being ineffective had “mostly come from people’s anecdotes and subjective feelings”.
The official response has done little to allay public fears over the reputation of drugs in public hospitals and pharmacies. It is the latest challenge to a healthcare system that is already under enormous strain because of a rapidly ageing population.
2 Likes
vongehr
#52
I get it. China is now at the top of basically every field from AI over hypersonics and new energy systems to quantum physics because they just produce fake stuff but buddy Russia stole all the great breakthroughs from the Ukraine.
LOL
Does nobody here find it to be quite a coincidence that the countries we are supposed to hate and love, suddenly Ukraine changed from totally corrupt to cradle of democracy, line up exactly with whose science is supposedly trustworthy?
Red Pill: American Pravda: China vs. America, by Ron Unz - The Unz Review
adssx
#53
You mostly post very low-value comments. Can you at least focus on longevity and medicine?
5 Likes
We’re providing data here - feel free to ignore it. Please try to keep “on-topic” for a given thread.
3 Likes
vongehr
#55
low value? did you study the link? did you understand the logic of my comment? clearly no and no
Exclusive: These universities have the most retracted scientific articles
A first-of-its-kind analysis by Nature reveals which institutions are retraction hotspots.
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-00455-y
5 Likes
