200px After a rapid succession of cases of major scientific fraud, scientific journals are questioning the effectiveness of the current peer review system and asking what their role should be in policing fraud. Less than a month after the confirmation that  Korean scientist Hwang Woo-Suk's cloning results were falsified, another case was discovered. A Norweigian researcher had made up patient histories of about 900 people for a study on cancer. Richard Horton, the editor of The Lancet, in which the research appeared, has responded to the scandal, "Peer review is a great system for detecting badly done research, but if you have an investigator determined to fabricate an entire study, it is not possible to pick it up." Related Wikinews
200px After a rapid succession of cases of major scientific fraud, scientific journals are questioning the effectiveness of the current peer review system and asking what their role should be in policing fraud. Less than a month after the confirmation that South Korean scientist Hwang Woo-Suk's cloning results were falsified, another case was discovered. A Norweigian researcher had made up patient histories of about 900 people for a study on cancer. Richard Horton, the editor of The Lancet, in which the research appeared, has responded to the scandal, "Peer review is a great system for detecting badly done research, but if you have an investigator determined to fabricate an entire study, it is not possible to pick it up." Related news
A
South
R
Wikinews
news