Marc Halushka MD, PhD
@marchalushka.bsky.social
Autopsy & cardiovascular pathologist at the Cleveland Clinic. I engage in microRNAs, heart disease, spatial single cell, and scientific integrity. Facts are facts, but opinions are my own.
Some journals think retracting papers makes them look bad. For me, the opposite is worse. Perpetuating bad/dishonest science, and forcing a field to work around papers that should be retracted, is a bad look. I start with a high degree of skepticism of splashy new papers in certain top journals.
October 29, 2025 at 4:19 PM
Some journals think retracting papers makes them look bad. For me, the opposite is worse. Perpetuating bad/dishonest science, and forcing a field to work around papers that should be retracted, is a bad look. I start with a high degree of skepticism of splashy new papers in certain top journals.
We are coming up on the 5 year anniversary of the discovery of a human "microRNA" biomarker for myocarditis. Despite how important and exciting this could be, it was never replicated because it is not a real "microRNA." The NEJM refused to retract this work. retractionwatch.com/author/halus...
Marc Halushka, Bastian Fromm, and Arun Patil
Read all of the posts by Marc Halushka, Bastian Fromm, and Arun Patil on Retraction Watch
retractionwatch.com
October 22, 2025 at 4:34 PM
We are coming up on the 5 year anniversary of the discovery of a human "microRNA" biomarker for myocarditis. Despite how important and exciting this could be, it was never replicated because it is not a real "microRNA." The NEJM refused to retract this work. retractionwatch.com/author/halus...
#2. This highlights the continuing shame of major journals doing a poor job of finding quality reviewers and not being responsible for the dubious work in their journals. They seem to want the flash, but are unwilling to clean up the messes they create.
October 22, 2025 at 4:28 PM
#2. This highlights the continuing shame of major journals doing a poor job of finding quality reviewers and not being responsible for the dubious work in their journals. They seem to want the flash, but are unwilling to clean up the messes they create.
#1. A huge number of "microRNAs" are not microRNAs. They will not act like microRNAs and should not be studied as microRNAs. Any studies of these "microRNAs" are dubious and likely erroneous and/or misinterpreted studies. MicroRNA studies should start with confirming it is in MirGeneDB.
October 22, 2025 at 4:26 PM
#1. A huge number of "microRNAs" are not microRNAs. They will not act like microRNAs and should not be studied as microRNAs. Any studies of these "microRNAs" are dubious and likely erroneous and/or misinterpreted studies. MicroRNA studies should start with confirming it is in MirGeneDB.
Reposted by Marc Halushka MD, PhD
June 15, 2025 at 11:43 AM
Here is a link to the article if anyone is interested (and if you do any gene expression in bulk or single cell, you should be): www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti...
Patterns of Unwanted Biological and Technical Expression Variation Among 49 Human Tissues
Tissue gene expression studies are impacted by biological and technical sources of variation, which can be broadly classified into wanted and unwanted…
www.sciencedirect.com
March 26, 2025 at 2:19 PM
Here is a link to the article if anyone is interested (and if you do any gene expression in bulk or single cell, you should be): www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti...
I love Cleveland, but it's not a Super Bowl town. They will fight it out with Detroit (and possibly Chicago/Minneapolis) for the one Midwest Super Bowl they will let happen every 20 years. Super Bowls will be in warm weather cities.
March 21, 2025 at 7:19 PM
I love Cleveland, but it's not a Super Bowl town. They will fight it out with Detroit (and possibly Chicago/Minneapolis) for the one Midwest Super Bowl they will let happen every 20 years. Super Bowls will be in warm weather cities.