> John’s fraud left me feeling personally violated, as if a thief had come to my home and rifled through my drawers and closets. Scientific fraud is, indeed, a kind of theft. Apart from the wasted time and ill-spent money, it is a blow to one’s reputation, and it damages a lab’s credibility.

I love how the author perpetrated scientific fraud and is playing the victim.

Part of the responsibility of a PI is supervision. The author put their name to the paper and the presentation. It is his responsibility to verify this.

Also what kind of lab culture did they create. Was there a super focus on discovery at all costs? Was the author just exploiting the post docs instead of actually properly supervising and mentoring them?

It kind of reminds me of the Wells-Fargo CEO who created a culture of high demands and no supervision then acted all surprised and innocent when fraud occurred. I think the people at the top of the hierarchy need to receive more blame, rather than push blame to the overworked, underpaid lowest person on the hierarchy.