>>23721633 pb
>Paper Chase: A Global Industry Fuels Scientific Fraud in the U.S.
one-sided story totally omits the opposite face of the coin
an all too common occurance is that young authors submit papers only to see them rejected by anonymous reviewers at one peer-review journal after another
then, a strange thing happens…
their research magically appears weeks or months later, except the author is none other than one of the reviewers who recommended rejection
about a third of my early papers suffered this fate, and my ideas were stolen by well-known established scientists who shouldn't need to resort to such underhanded tactics
just because a "paper mill" assists in getting a manuscript accepted for publication does NOT automatically imply the research is unworthy
if the truth be told, half of the research published is unworthy, consisting of a rehash of nearly identical papers by the same authors
or shoddy research with specious conclusions that were reviewed by "pals" of the author(s)