4 ms·

I feel like there should be criminal charges, as the treatments and their side effects have affected people and robbed them of proper care. The amount of people

I feel like there should be criminal charges, as the treatments and their side effects have affected people and robbed them of proper care. The amount of people affected by this is humongous.

ai_ja_nai 5y ago
I respectfully disagree: public shaming should be enough. After all, we have a scientific community for this exact reason: we can tell frauds, or blatant mistakes if we want to feel charitable, by examining them collectively. And that serves as an immunity system against these cases. No other vengeanceful punishment is really necessary. Also, if we really are fond of consequences, frauds carry over the price of having to confront, for future publishing, with a scientific community that has grown a bias against the frauder; and the latter will have to regain trust if he/she wants to publish again. The criminal charges should be for those who use unproven scientific results to endorse their own foul agenda.
- catgary 5y ago
  I don’t know, it seems like the consequences of fraud change significantly once someone has stepped into the realm of medical research. Publishing fraudulent research seems like it is, at the very least, medical malpractice and should affect the author’s ability to practice medicine.
- csunbird 5y ago
  The thing is, the impact of this fraud is not simply monetary damage or wasted time of researchers, the impact is lives lost or permanent damages done to affected patients health and well being. The consequences are quite different.
- hnfong 5y ago
  It's not vengeanceful punishment, it's detriment. If a system allowed me to publish fraudulent research or publish bad research recklessly, with the only consequence being "public shaming" (which is sometimes not really consequential if one has the right connections to the right people), what's to prevent me (and everyone else) from doing it over and over again? TBH from a legal perspective knowingly publishing false information for personal gain is already fraud. You're arguing that authorities should stay away because academia should somehow have immunity? That's a very disturbing line of thought.
hanselot 5y ago

I feel like there should be criminal charges, as the treatments and their side effects have affected people and robbed them of proper care. The amount of people affected by this is humongous.

ai_ja_nai 5y ago

I respectfully disagree: public shaming should be enough. After all, we have a scientific community for this exact reason: we can tell frauds, or blatant mistakes if we want to feel charitable, by examining them collectively. And that serves as an immunity system against these cases. No other vengeanceful punishment is really necessary. Also, if we really are fond of consequences, frauds carry over the price of having to confront, for future publishing, with a scientific community that has grown a bias against the frauder; and the latter will have to regain trust if he/she wants to publish again. The criminal charges should be for those who use unproven scientific results to endorse their own foul agenda.

catgary 5y ago
I don’t know, it seems like the consequences of fraud change significantly once someone has stepped into the realm of medical research. Publishing fraudulent research seems like it is, at the very least, medical malpractice and should affect the author’s ability to practice medicine.
csunbird 5y ago
The thing is, the impact of this fraud is not simply monetary damage or wasted time of researchers, the impact is lives lost or permanent damages done to affected patients health and well being. The consequences are quite different.
hnfong 5y ago
It's not vengeanceful punishment, it's detriment. If a system allowed me to publish fraudulent research or publish bad research recklessly, with the only consequence being "public shaming" (which is sometimes not really consequential if one has the right connections to the right people), what's to prevent me (and everyone else) from doing it over and over again? TBH from a legal perspective knowingly publishing false information for personal gain is already fraud. You're arguing that authorities should stay away because academia should somehow have immunity? That's a very disturbing line of thought.

hanselot 5y ago