• RAK Richardson et al. PNAS 2025; https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.242009212. Open Access PDF! The entities enabling scientific fraud at scale are large, resilient, and growing rapidly
• Review of this study in Carl Zimmer, NY Times 8/4/25, Fraudulent Scientific Papers Are Rapidly Increasing, Study Finds

Excerpts from NY Times Article:

“A team of researchers found evidence of shady organizations churning out fake or low-quality studies on an industrial scale. And their output is rising fast, threatening the integrity of many fields…“If these trends are not stopped, science is going to be destroyed,” said Luís A. Nunes Amaral, a data scientist at Northwestern University and an author of the study”

““Science relies on trusting what others did, so you do not have to repeat everything,” Dr. Amaral said….By the 2010s, journal editors and watchdog organizations were warning that this trust was under threat. They flagged a growing number of papers with fabricated data and doctored images. In the years that followed, the factors driving this increase grew more intense.”

“As more graduate students were trained in labs, the competition for a limited number of research jobs sharpened. High-profile papers became essential for success, not just for landing a job, but also for getting promotions and grants. Academic publishers have responded to the demand by opening thousands of new scientific journals every year…”

“Organizations known as paper mills are now turning scientific fraud into a lucrative business. Scientists eager to pad out their resumes can pay hundreds to thousands of dollars to be named as an author of a paper that they had nothing to do with…paper mills often use artificial intelligence to alter the text they lift from other papers…”

“The papers that Dr. Amaral and his colleagues could study came to light only because of the work of independent sleuths. To estimate how many paper mill papers have yet to be exposed, Dr. Amaral’s team created a statistical model that accurately predicted the rate at which suspicious papers surfaced. They estimate that the number of paper mill products may be 100 times greater than the ones they have identified…”

“In their new study, they calculated that the number of suspicious new papers appearing each year was doubling every 1.5 years. That’s far faster than the increase of scientific papers overall, which is doubling every 15 years.”

““We need to stop making it profitable to game the system.”

My take: This problem has preceded the widespread use of AI, although Al makes it harder to detect. Unfortunately, fake scientific reporting appears to be worsening.

Related article: Jessica Steier NY Times 8/19/25: The Playbook Used to ‘Prove’ Vaccines Cause Autism This article details very specifically how David Geier (now appointed by RFK Jr to evaluate vaccines and autism) and his father have produced multiple flawed studies regarding vaccine safety. This commentary takes a particularly deep dive into one of his articles on the preservative thimerosol. She shows that the authors likely used p-hacking to identify “atypical autism” since there was not a significant association with autism, compared different time cohorts (the control group was from a period with different diagnostic criteria/lower rates of autism), did not include confounders, and supported their arguments with “personal citing.”

Some excerpts:

There have been some 70 studies since Mr. Wakefield’s looking for any link between vaccines and autism. Of these, 26 have linked vaccines to autism in some way, and 43 found no connection between vaccines and autism.

A whopping two-thirds of studies that claimed to have found a link were written by  David and Mark Geier. These studies have been heavily criticized for using deceptive research techniques and flawed data.

Among the eight other studies that found a link, four were retracted for data manipulation, flawed methods or undisclosed conflicts of interest. Most of the authors have been involved in anti-vaccination campaigns and have had other papers retracted.

One such study that Mr. Kennedy referred to in his Senate confirmation hearing was published in a WordPress blog disguised as a journal and was funded by an anti-vaccine organization, among other problems.

Fortunately, independent scientists have conducted more than 40 high-quality studies since 1998 involving over 5.6 million people across seven countries. All found no connection between vaccines and autism. These studies were rigorously designed, were reviewed by independent peers and do not contain telltale signs of data manipulation, as the Geier studies do.

Related blog posts:

• One Bad Apple Spoils the Bunch
• Do We Need Lie Detector Tests for Research Participants?
• Why Dr. Oz Has Not Lost His Medical License