In the face of the potential fraud unearthed by Schrag, it’s not as if the world has changed overnight.
Four months after Schrag submitted his concerns to the NIH, the NIH turned around and awarded Lesné a five-year grant to study … Alzheimer’s.
That grant was awarded by Austin Yang, program director at the NIH’s National Institute on Aging.
Yang also happens to be another of the co-authors on the 2006 paper.
Just another fortunate Cohenchinkdence, goyim.
Archive of the original source this post's article is copy-pasted from:
Part before that is enraging:
What intrigued Schrag when he came back to this seminal work were the images. Images in the paper that were supposed to show the relationship between memory issues and the presence of Aβ*56 appeared to have been altered. Some of them appeared to have been pieced together from multiple images. Schrag shied away from actually accusing this foundational paper of being a “fraud,” but he definitely raised “red flags.” He raised those concerns, discreetly at first, in a letter sent directly to the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Only when that letter failed to generate a response did Schrag bring his suspicions to others.
Now Science has concluded its own six-month review, during which it consulted with image experts. What they found seems to confirm Schrag’s suspicions.
They concurred with his overall conclusions, which cast doubt on hundreds of images, including more than 70 in Lesné’s papers. Some look like “shockingly blatant” examples of image tampering, says Donna Wilcock, an Alzheimer’s expert at the University of Kentucky.
After reviewing the images, molecular biologist Elisabeth Bik said of the paper, “The obtained experimental results might not have been the desired results, and that data might have been changed to … better fit a hypothesis.”
Should this fraud turn out to be as extensive as it appears at first glance, the implications go well beyond just misdirecting tens of billions in funding and millions of hours of research over the last two decades. Since that 2006 publication, the presence or absence of this specific amyloid has often been treated as diagnostic of Alzheimer’s. 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.
TRUST THE SCIENCE! SCIENCE IS REAL! REEEEEEEEEEE!
There is a considerable difference between science and "The Science"
sounds like the church vs Galileo to me, cant have the prevailing narrative challenged
Almost through Kennedy's book 'The real Anthony Fauci'.
This sounds like business as usual in the medical establishment. Fraud seems to be the rule, not the exception. See AIDS and COVID research.
Thanks to the power of the internet, we now have endless ways to expose them.
What kind of expose are you implying? The hunter biden way?
Some things are better off unseen.
You're not suggesting this whole fraud was orchestrated by … mmm … JEWS?
(post is archived)