Hacker News Reader

Comment by hiq | Hacker News Reader

> The frauds and bad scientists will be found out, eventually.

The Stanford president mentioned is 63 years old and had a full academic career before being found out. It might even be that he remains financially well-off (I'm assuming his current role paid well for the last few years).

For every big case such as this one, how many more commit fraud without being noticed?

These quotes address what a scientist should do to do science, not what is practical to have a career in academia. The latter is more relevant in practice, because rigor and integrity don't get you tenure on their own.

View on HN

Exactly. He stiffled the career of many honest scientists by siphoning money and prestige that should rightfully have been directed elsewhere. The damage is done.

This documentary series comes to mind [1], where in the end they go over the fallout and all the collective research years wasted and budding careers stunted (including people outright leaving research) because as students/postdocs trying to replicate the work of a scientist who was considered to be a potential nobel laureate, they couldn't possibly question the work they were trying to replicate.

I feel this aspect of research fraud is even worse than the other established scientists who had their research impacted. In the mentioned case, the established scientists were essentially unharmed with a large body of other work to lean on and many having some form of job security, while the PhDs and postdocs suddenly found themselves unable to list most of their experience on their CV, despite the established scientists being the most qualified to verify the fraudster's work. Especially for someone in a leadership position at a university, I wonder how that doesn't eat them up inside.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nfDoml-Db64

> It might even be that he remains financially well-off (I'm assuming his current role paid well for the last few years).

I would say so. From one of the article:

> Tessier-Lavigne’s salary at Regeneron in 2014 was $1,764,032, according to a previously-unreported class action lawsuit alleging excessive compensation for members of the Compensation Committee, which included Tessier-Lavigne. It was later settled. He earned $1,555,296 from Stanford in 2021 with an additional $700,000 annually as a board director for Regeneron.

> Tessier-Lavigne’s salary at Regeneron

Wait, the company that re-sells "medical waste"? e.g. foreskins, cord blood, placentas? Body parts that should reside with their rightly owner, but doctors butcher and steal for self-enrichment?

The "The frauds and bad scientists will be found out, eventually" is still relevant. The point is that the priniciples of collaborative peer review should keep the field on track, not that it will rain vengeance down on some miscreant. The papers being retracted is far more important, in the long run, than this person being punshed or not.

But it should also be a reminder to those not in academic fields to take preprints and even published research with a huge grain of salt. Between political pressure, incentives to cheat to get funding and status, and the “infallibility” of people in authority, peer reviewed research is not looking very good to the average Joe. Hopefully it will eventually get straightened out, but it’s looking more like an entrenched ministry of truth.

I've been fascinated by this recently. Could you wind up better off, even getting exposed with a fraud scandal.

We always assume it's a tragic tale, and we're seeing someone crushed into a rock bottom state. It seems in many cases they still end up ahead of where they would be.

I even wondered if that would happen with Theranos. It's possible she's even ahead now of where she would be without fraud. I tend to think a lengthy prison sentence is never worth it, but if she had got off easier that would be a different story.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com