I’m talking about an administrative role to help editors catch problems with images. As you mentioned you aren’t a scientist

You wouldn’t be involved in review of the significance of the article

You did not supply your cv

It is not online

Yes

I’m not confused

Piller is confused

Of course

You keep thinking I’m criticizing your work - I’m not

I’m criticizing Piller’s conclusion that these details impact overall progress in Alzheimer field

Scientists disagree all the time & don’t believe everything they read. No single paper changes a scientist’s views

I am happy to hear that you are an honest person trying to do good. It’s obvious you aren’t a scientist. But your work is important for science

You could help journals improve scientific integrity by preventing publication of 💩

Do that

whistleblowersblog.org/false-claims...

youtu.be/zcr_xQFV--4

People retract manuscripts all the time if there are too many mistakes or if data cannot be reproduced. That’s how science has worked for centuries
You caught mistakes;He got investigated;He retracted some papers. You did your job to ID mistakes. Characterizing those mistakes as fraud seems overkill

Do you get more money syphoning from NIH by whistleblowing about duplicate images than you would working for a journal to prevent publishing fraud?

NIH& universities takes scientific fraud seriously. What would be good would be if journals employed people like you to catch the problems before editors send manuscripts out for review

Ruining someone’s career because you THINK they misrepresented the data w/o certainty is a waste of talent

Zlokovic is being investigated by NIH & the university with external & internal committees

He has all the slides & blots -not a mantra - the actual slides and blots and notebooks

It is very hard for Editors and reviewers to catch these errors.

Reviewers are very overburdened.

Now that there is nice AI we can review our own paper to ensure there are no duplicate images

I’m not attacking you-I’m attacking Piller. You are 💯 correct about these images. Was it deliberate? I doubt it. Slides have multiple sections. A single slide can have 4 antibodies. When you are preparing representative sections post analysis after unblinding you are picking from thousands of slides

Again representative images are not the data

If images are incorrect -one can correct the manuscript by a formal process

youtu.be/zcr_xQFV--4

The difference between a preclinical trial & a clinical trial is that one is in patients and the other not in patients

The similarities are that they both test therapeutics

And I agree 💯 with you that you are a nuisance

Representative images to exemplify analysis of double blinded studies are not the data

Data are quantified. Analysis is done by experiments blinded to treatment assignment

Cherry picking images has nothing to do with the data

When mistakes in images are found journals allow corrections

😂

Wordle 1,316 4/6

🟩⬛⬛⬛⬛
🟩⬛🟩⬛⬛
🟩🟩🟩⬛🟩
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩

You’re the worst newspaper on the planet. FYI: here’s the perspective of what’s going on. We support a massive exodus of your esteemed reporters because you left us no choice. Our lives depend on us supporting independent media-not your pseudo news outlet

www.theglobeandmail.com/business/art...

Seriously ? How sane wash can you get ?

This in a ALL of Amazon not just Whole Foods

This is fighting against Bezos racist oversight & crappy salaries EVERYWHERE including in Canada

That’d be the headline for a real newspaper that wasn’t afraid of dictators

in the majority of political articles @nytimes continue to mix 1984-leaning headlines to please both sides

Newsflash -We are not pleased with sanewashing, manipulation & lack of investigative reporting in many articles

Let the exodus from mainstream media to independent media begin

Followed them all

Ask them 🙏 to start posting

@drsusanoliver.Bsky.social
@jsm2334.bsky.social
@therealtruther.bsky.social