What’s more problematic than a Seralini paper? A plagiarized version of it

|

The GLP aggregated and excerpted this blog/article to reflect the diversity of news, opinion and analysis.

A 2012 paper co-authored by Gilles Seralini, who has published controversial research showing the dangers of genetically modified foods, has been plagiarized by another researcher.

The 2016 paper, published in the International Journal of Technical Research and Applications, has not been retracted, but the text comparison is fairly obvious.

It’s a case of intra-predatory crime: the International Journal of Technical Research and Applications is on the list of predatory journals compiled by Jeffrey Beall, and the Seralini paper appeared in the Journal of Environmental Protection, which is published by Scientific Research Publishing, which Beall considers to be a predatory publisher.

. . . .

We discovered this case after the first author of the 2012 paper — Robin Mesnage, a research associate at King’s College — alerted us to the similarities. Mesnage said he discovered the 2016 paper from an email alert via Google Scholar.

. . . .

The only way we know the text of the IJTRA paper is from a pdf Mesnage forwarded to us of the paper — the link to the abstract online is now blank. Mesnage told us he contacted the journal, but hadn’t heard anything back from anyone about the paper:

If we can’t find anything on this publication I will consider that it’s retracted, but I will keep an eye on the February issue of this journal.

. . . .

We have been unable to find contact information for the author of the 2016 article, Hitendra J. Jani, whose affiliation on the paper is listed as “Bharuch Enviro Infrastructure Ltd., Plot No. 9701-9716, GIDC, Ankleshwar, Bharuch District, Gujarat, India.”

Read full, original post: Seralini paper released by predatory publisher is plagiarized by predatory journal

  • Karin Haselbach

    I am an interested layperson who doesn’t actually do any science herself, but I ask myself why the flying eff would someone plagiarize *this* study which has already been pulverized (hehe) by peer scientists?