Editor's Corner

No guarantees against fraud
You have to sympathize with the editors at Science magazine (see the story below). They were the unwitting victims of research fraud, agreeing to publish the scandalously fictionalized cloning work of Hwang Woo-Suk. At the time, of course, it was the stuff of worldwide headlines. But it proved to be too good to be true--for now. Ultimately, when a world-renowned scientist opts to make up study results, there really isn't a fail-safe fact-checking process that any journal can implement without completely disrupting their production schedule.

This wasn't the work of some obscure scientist with a suspicious background. The peer-review process was handled appropriately and the magazine has done an outstanding overall job in screening what it publishes. The fallout from this incident has terminated the scientist's credibility. That's appropriate. Let's encourage all the journals to take a more skeptical approach when new findings are particularly sensational. But in an age that sees a lot of jaw-dropping science every week, we also need to understand that occasionally some fraudulent studies will get through. The harsh retribution faced by rogue scientists is the most effective deterrent against future fraud. - John Carroll