Article: How Scientific Fraud Could Set Alzheimers Research Way Back

Photo Source: Wikimedia Commons

Science evolves from the successes of earlier research, building upon a body of knowledge that subsequent generations depend on to create discoveries. The practice of science requires the execution of repeatable experiments that either help to support or disprove hypotheses. In other words, scientists perform experiments to challenge their understanding of the world, and we need these experiments to be able to be repeated so that other scientists can see if they got the same results as the original. The truth remains central to science’s success because scientists study other scientists’ work to help support new hypotheses and make discoveries. However, if unscrupulous researchers manipulate experimental results to make a theory appear true when it is not, the foundation of science gets cracked— perhaps not broken but cracked.

On July 21, 2022, the prestigious journal, Science, published an article by Charles Pillar, an award-winning investigative science reporter. In his article titled, “Blots on a Field? A Neuroscience Image Sleuth Finds Signs of Fabrication in Scores of Alzheimer’s Articles, Threatening a Reigning Theory of the Disease,” Pillar details an investigation of the images used to support an essential hypothesis in Alzheimer’s research. The hypothesis suggests that a short protein called “Amyloid-beta star 56” or Ab*56 plays a causative role in Alzheimer’s disease development. (science.org) Alzheimer’s Disease (AD) is the most common form of age-related dementia in the world. AD involves cumulative loss of memory and cognitive function over time, resulting in progressive deterioration of the ability to remember names and people. The disease progression leads to states of fear, anxiety, and lack of ability to perform simple daily activities such as tooth brushing, general hygiene, and cooking. Advanced AD patients end up requiring full-time care.

Autopsy of AD brains reveals the accumulation of plaques made up of amyloid-beta proteins, but researchers could not prove that the plaques caused AD. The argument that Ab*56 instigates memory loss in AD first emerged in a publication in the influential journal Nature. In an article titled “A Specific Amyloid-β Protein Assembly in the Brain Impairs Memory,” the authors included Sylvain Lesné and Karen H. Ashe of the University of Minnesota. (nature.com) According to Nature, this paper has been cited 2,270 times in other research publications, putting it in the top 1% of all research articles written around 2006 when the paper came out. Such attention suggests the influence this research had on the Alzheimer’s field, and the authors’ suggestion that Ab*56 played a causative role in AD greatly influenced the research field for over 16 years. However, suppose the allegations that Lesné fabricated the data supporting the role of Ab*56 in AD. In that case, Lesné’s and Ashe’s hypothesis falls apart, and the subsequent research chasing a false hypothesis ends up in a colossal waste of time and billions of dollars of research funding.

The Alzheimer’s Disease research community has an online forum to facilitate researchers’ communication and highlight breaking news in AD called Alzforum Networking for a Cure. (alzforum.org) The community on Alzforum has come out to comment on the allegations that Lesné fabricated the data to support the hypothesis that Ab*56 causes AD, with 24 comments from researchers in the field as of August 2, 2022. One comment notes that a former colleague of Lesné at the University Caen Normandy in France retracted a manuscript for publication over concerns about the veracity of some of Lesné’s figures. (alzforum.org) Others commented that the work with Ab*56 could not be replicated in other labs. Dr. Karen Ashe did not comment on the figures from Lesné because of the active investigation at the University of Minnesota, but she defended her work in mice as reproducible. Other researchers, such as Dr. Jürgen Götz of the University of Queensland, Australia, expressed disappointment in the integrity of Dr. Lesné but noted that other more promising avenues of research might open up without the false expectations that Ab*56 causes AD in humans.

Fraud in science damages the reputation of the scientific method and can set back research for years until the fraudulent hypothesis gets detected. Recently, an investigative article published in the journal Science exposed fraudulent data in an essential paper in the field of Alzheimer’s Disease research. Forensic analysis of the images made by Dr. Lesné that show Ab*56 causes AD appears to be Photoshopped. Such fraud casts doubt on the role of Ab*56 and indicates that a great deal of time and money have been wasted in the critical world of AD research. Unfortunately, fraud can occur wherever people work. However, scientists have curious and critical natures that help to expose fraud and patch up the foundation of research when it gets cracked.

Dr. Smith’s career in scientific and information research spans the areas of bioinformatics, artificial intelligence, toxicology, and chemistry. He has published a number of peer-reviewed scientific papers. He has worked over the past seventeen years developing advanced analytics, machine learning, and knowledge management tools to enable research and support high-level decision making. Tim completed his Ph.D. in Toxicology at Cornell University and a Bachelor of Science in chemistry from the University of Washington.

You can buy his book on Amazon in paperback and in kindle format here.