Fraud and Deception in Science
Authors: Inder M. Verma
Journal: Molecular Therapy (2003)

A natural scientist must be at once a general and a spy.—Nobel Laureate, Richard Willstater At a congressional hearing in 1981, Philip Handler, then president of the National Academy of Sciences, opened his testimony by stating, “it gives me little pleasure and satisfaction” to testify on the subject of scientific fraud. He added that the media grossly exaggerates most scientific fraud and that “it occurs in a system that operates in an effec- tive, democratic, and self-correcting mode.” The vast majority of scientists will readily agree with Handler on both counts. The fundamental tenets of science are based on the princi- ple that researchers honestly make and record the observations they publish in scientific journals in a form that permits others to duplicate the experimental observations. The nature of fraud in science varies widely. I have generally considered it to be the pres- entation of experimental data that does not exist, or that has been altered to fit an author's hypothesis. However, there are different shades of fraud that include the selective presen- tation of data, the inappropriate use of others’ data without proper credit, the deliberate omission of others’ data to enhance one's claims of priority, or the deliberate distortion of others’ data. In their book, Betrayers of Truth, science journalists William Broad and Nicholas Wade point out that many great scientists throughout the ages have committed some degree of fraud to advance their theories and ideas, including “the great astronomer of antiquity,” Claudio Ptolemy, physicists Galileo Galilei and Isaac Newton, the chemist John Dalton, and even the beloved founder of genetics, Gregor Mendel. Did they really commit fraud or merely tweak their data to fit their ideas? Science historians and philosophers view science as a vocation that is kept honest by the devotion to truth by individual scientists. Others believe that it is the community of sci- entists, and not the individual, that guarantees scientific integrity. Experimental science constantly faces a challenge—it demands objectively discernable facts—the criterion of truth, but the reality is that mundane facts are not what make science exciting. Broad and Wade argue that finding facts is actually less rewarding than developing a theory or a prin- ciple that explains the facts, and “herein lies the enticement to play fast and loose with facts.” When I was serving on a committee awarding prizes in science, the first dictum was, “There is no reward for being second.” Priority of discovery is often an overriding consid- eration for scientists, and at times has led to the temptation to invent data. Despite a spate of recently well-publicized cases of fraud in science, I believe these events are anomalies and exceedingly rare. This is not to say that scientists are morally superior. Instead, we benefit from institutional mechanisms designed to guarantee and enforce hon- esty in science. Science sociologist, Robert K. Merton, ascribes “the virtual absence of fraud in the annals of science to the verifiability of results, the exacting scrutiny of fellow experts, the subjection of scientists’ activities to a rigorous policing, to a degree perhaps unparal- leled in any other field of activity.” Expert referees are the first line of defense against fraud, by ensuring that proper methodology is used, that conclusions are supported by data, and that the appropriate scientific literature is cited. The next line of defense is reproducibility, a key feature of experimental science. The system is not foolproof and a determined indi- vidual can cheat it, but sooner or later the truth will emerge. Because reputations in science are built on credibility, we must also be vigilant against false accusations or rumors. They not only cause pain and anguish to the falsely accused, but also damage the credibility of science. Molecular Therapy will do its best to guard against the twin evils of fraud and fraudulent accusations in science.