Elsevier: science or rogue scoundrels?
Elsevier, one of the world's most famous publishers in academic science that publishes The Lancet, Cell, the ScienceDirect and the Scopus database, did it really big this time.
After reading the news I didn't know whether to laugh or cry. I didn't believe it, but reading the original source confirmed it. Initially I thought it was a provocation by the authors, but it should have come out of the review process which is apparently non-existent. The authors are real and some even have relevant 'performances':
Unfortunately, the precedent does not seem to be an isolated case. Once again, the original source confirms the absence of revision. In this case, too, the authors are real and some even have notable 'performances':
Sadly, it is a well-known fact that scientific research is mainly fictitious because it is oriented towards funding and careers rather than the advancement of knowledge, but here we have really hit rock bottom.
Rogue scoundrels 🤡🤡🤡
Edit: Unfortunately, The Lancet, despite being one of the most prestigious historical journals, is not new to such episodes that highlight the superficiality or complete absence of the review process and raise serious doubts about the reliability of the published articles.
A few years ago, The Lancet made one of the biggest retractions in modern history about a possible cure for Covid-19. How could this happen? According to the opinion in an article in the Guardian:
"The answer is quite simple. It happened because peer review, the formal process of reviewing scientific work before it is accepted for publication, is not designed to detect anomalous data. It makes no difference if the anomalies are due to inaccuracies, miscalculations, or outright fraud. This is not what peer review is for. While it is the internationally recognised badge of “settled science”, its value is far more complicated."
An interesting insight into The Lancet and scientific research in general. Lancet gate: a matter of fact or a matter of concern.