One of the two retraction statements published by the journals was from the author of the study on hydroxychloroquine on Covid-19 treatment. (AP)

Reputed medical journals The Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) early on Friday published retraction statements from the authors of two studies — one on hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) in treatment of Covid-19 and another on the effect of some cardiovascular drugs.

The statements came after grave questions were raised about the quality of data used in both studies, sourced from a Chicago firm called Surgisphere.

The retractions came following the company’s refusal to give access to the data for an independent audit. Surgisphere continues to stand its ground — in a detailed response on the concerns raised, it said: “… we stand behind the integrity of our studies and our scientific researchers, clinical partners, and data analysts.”

For the global scientific community, though, neither are retractions and questionable data/analyses new, nor are their spirited defence, including interesting ones such as the data having been eaten by termites. In fact, there is even a name for this: the Darsee Syndrome for compulsive need among researchers to publish papers or perish.

The name derives itself from John Darsee, a young investigator who was considered extremely bright and was offered a job in Harvard in 1979, very early in his career before being accused of data fraud. This is how he was described in a 2011 article in ‘Nature Medicine’ on retractions in scientific journals: “John Darsee was a young clinical investigator with a long list of publications in top-tier journals and a promising career ahead of him in cardiology research. Described by a former supervisor as “one of the most remarkable young men in American medicine,” Darsee was offered a faculty position at Harvard Medical School in Boston at the age of 33. But then his career quickly started to unravel.

“One day, colleagues caught Darsee fraudulently labelling data for a study into heart attacks; further investigations revealed scientific misconduct on a massive scale, and, eventually, Darsee was fired and barred from receiving federal grant money for ten years. More than 80 of his papers were withdrawn from the literature. He ultimately apologized for publishing “inaccuracies and falsehoods”.”

Some years ago, Canadian researcher Ranjit Chandra, a former professor of Memorial University, sued CBC for a three-part document called ‘The Secret Life of Dr Chandra’ that talked about his fraudulent research, which was retracted by many journals. Chandra was asked to pay $1.6 million to the broadcaster to cover legal expenses.

Chandra’s study on whether some infant formulae can protect a child from eczema was published in BMJ in 1995 but retracted 10 years later.

In the retraction note, BMJ editors wrote: “The BMJ has retracted the article after receiving a copy of an inquiry into the research of R K Chandra, which was conducted by the Memorial University of Newfoundland and completed in August 1995. The university did not publish the inquiry report at the time. Nor did it notify the editors of journals that had published articles by Chandra that were considered in the report…”

Closer home in Moradabad, Dr R B Singh, a private practitioner, co-authored what BMJ, which published the study on diet and heart disease in 1992, calls a “citation classic,” cited 225 times (at the time of writing), including in guidelines. In his correspondence with BMJ between 1992 and 2003, Singh’s letterheads said he is an honorary professor of preventive cardiology and nutrition. His address in Moradabad has been the address of the Heart Research Laboratory, the Heart Research Laboratory and Centre of Nutrition Research, the Centre of Nutrition and Heart Research, the Medical Hospital and Research Centre, and the International College of Nutrition.

Faced with questions about some of his papers and an investigation started by Dr Samiran Nundy, then editor of the National Medical Journal of India, Singh famously told those probing his work that his records had been eaten by termites. In the interim, his papers continued to appear in other journals, including The Lancet.

While BMJ did not retract the paper, it rejected several others from Singh and mounted a long investigation.