Health -   

1

Fake data behind red wine benefit claims, experts allege

This Nov. 8, 2011 photo shows a glass of red wine in Concord, N.H. The best wines for holiday parties are like good hosts, accommodating enough to handle a variety of scenarios, but with enough personality to keep everyone entertained. (AP Photo/Matthew Mead)
This Nov. 8, 2011 photo shows a glass of red wine in Concord, N.H. The best wines for holiday parties are like good hosts, accommodating enough to handle a variety of scenarios, but with enough personality to keep everyone entertained. (AP Photo/Matthew Mead)

View Larger Image

A A |  Email ThisEmail  | PrintComments (6) Facebook   

Selected Comment

The number one reason why there's so little respect for proper science and it's findings. There's a whole sleuth of poor studies, poorly interpreted data and data falsification by individuals who just want to promote themselves and their work instead of the scientific process. Hard to build trust and support under such "reasearch" pollution

Phil Ottawa

Fake data behind red wine benefit claims, experts allege

talking about
Fake data behind red wine benefit claims, experts allege

Date: Wednesday Jan. 11, 2012 8:56 PM ET

HARTFORD, Conn. — A U.S. university says a researcher known for his work on red wine's benefits to cardiovascular health falsified his data in more than 100 instances.

Nearly a dozen scientific journals are being warned of the potential problems after publishing the University of Connecticut professor's studies.

University officials say dismissal proceedings have started against Dipak Das, director of the UConn Health Center's Cardiovascular Research Center.

UConn says it started investigating Das' work after receiving an anonymous complaint of potential irregularities in his research, and that it found 145 instances of fabricated, falsified and manipulated data.

Das has gained attention for research into an ingredient in red wine that's shown potential for promoting health, though the university did not say whether the falsifications occurred in research on that topic.

Das could not immediately be reached for comment.

Comments are now closed for this story

Arctic Researcher
said
0 0

Actually Tim & JD; they were NOT vindicated by anyone other than their employer. The responsible scientific community has conclusively stated that their research and conclusions are heavily flawed. The science is hardly "conclusive".


Jordan
said
0 0

I read an extremely comprehensive study that followed thousands of people over a decade who consumed Omega 3 regularily - the study refutes every benefit claimed under Omega 3. I take issue with industries, drug, vatamin etc who can make any claim they like with the weakest of tests. People, Omega 3 is BOGUS. Contrary to claims - Omega 3 does not help with your Alzeimers, heart, depression, anxiety, arthritis, and the list goes on. The reason you took Omega 3 for your depression is to feel better right? How do you feel now? Like crap!! Stop wasting your money. The PR machine is always working.


Tim the Toolman
said
0 0

Peer review is important but so having more than a few researchers working in a particular area.There are literally thousands of scientists/researchers contributing to climate science from many areas and more than 99% agree with the conclusions on GHGs. Even the noted skeptic Richard Muller changed his mind. Also, the scientists involved in ClimateGate should have stayed out of politics but there research was independently reviewed and vindicated.


JD
said
0 0

Jim - North Saanich, BC said "This is no different from what we have encountered with "Climategate" except I guess we will have to call this one "Winegate". " Except the climate researchers were vindicated in the end and their methodology was proven sound. You're saying that is likely to happen here? Doesn't sound like it. That's the beauty of the science community. Everything is peer reviewed and if you weren't honest, you'll get caught and it'll be public.


Phil Ottawa
said
0 0

The number one reason why there's so little respect for proper science and it's findings. There's a whole sleuth of poor studies, poorly interpreted data and data falsification by individuals who just want to promote themselves and their work instead of the scientific process. Hard to build trust and support under such "reasearch" pollution


Jim - North Saanich, BC
said
0 0

This is no different from what we have encountered with "Climategate" except I guess we will have to call this one "Winegate". As a former academic myself, one might have hoped for more honesty in "research" work but then little surprises me any more. As long as you are seen to be doing research and the money keeps flowing with which to do it, there are some who could care less about academic honesty and integrity. Perhaps it is a direct result of the "publish or perish" mentality I saw years ago in two major universities.


Share with your social Network:

Facebook DIGG Newsvine Delicious Twitter StumbeUpon Reddit Yahoo! Buzz

 

Advertisement

Contest

Today's Health Stories

oxycontin

Saskatchewan joins push to stop funding OxyContin

More

Senior citizen

U.S. Alzheimer's strategy: Better treatment by 2025

More

CFIA generic

CFIA recalls cooked ham sold in Ontario and Quebec

More