Friday, 7 September 2007

Denouncing your own publications as 'crap'

What happens when you have an academic system that prioritises quantity of publications over everything else? What happens when drug companies need eminent scientists to conclude that their stuff works? Predictably, you get perverse results. Like this one, detailed here and here (and all over the interweb).

In this case, it seems as if the putative author of the ghost-written work is happy to disown it. I can imagine similar cases where the author would be happy to put the resulting bogus publication on their CV, because it's nice to have a career. It's a vortex of shit, folks.

No comments: