Neuropathologist Adriano Aguzzi has been cleared of research misconduct and negligence in a probe of 36 studies he co-authored over 28 years.\u00a0<\/p>\n
The University of Zurich, where Aguzzi was based until he retired earlier this year, conducted the investigation, which started in March 2024 and looked at studies he co-authored between 1996 and 2023.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Most read <\/p>\n
On 2 July, the university released its report (in German)<\/a> that resulted from its probe, alongside a statement from Aguzzi<\/a>, which is in English.\u00a0<\/p>\n The report, which The Transmitter had professionally translated<\/a>, states that seven of Aguzzi\u2019s papers contain \u201cscientifically significant\u201d errors.<\/p>\n The report states that it\u2019s incumbent on Aguzzi to retract or correct these seven papers. If Aguzzi fails to retract or correct these studies, \u201cthis would constitute a separate violation of good scientific practice,\u201d the report says.<\/p>\n Out of the 36 papers examined, 24 list Aguzzi as corresponding author, the report states. Aguzzi is responsible for errors in up to a dozen of these papers, the report found, but was not found guilty of research misconduct because neither intent nor negligence could be established.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cAlthough this whole thing was very painful, I welcome the opportunity to be able to correct whatever needs to be corrected and also to retract whatever is wrong,\u201d Aguzzi told The Transmitter. \u201cI want to be done with this.\u201d<\/p>\n \n A<\/p>\n guzzi says that about two and a half years ago he received an \u201cextensive dossier\u201d that highlighted problems with dozens of his papers. In science journalist Charles Piller\u2019s book \u201cDoctored<\/a>: Fraud, Arrogance, and Tragedy in the Quest to Cure Alzheimer\u2019s<\/a>,\u201d he mentions giving the dossier to Aguzzi in February 2024, who then shared it with the University of Zurich\u2019s vice president for research.\u00a0<\/p>\n Many papers mentioned in the dossier had already been flagged on the post-publication peer-review site PubPeer<\/a>, where Aguzzi had posted some replies and comments. \u201cAt some point, these discussions on PubPeer got so ugly that I simply withdrew,\u201d he recalls.\u00a0<\/p>\n Aguzzi\u2014who cut his lab in half after 2019 to improve supervision\u2014says that he had previously fired a postdoctoral researcher once it became clear that the researcher had fabricated data. Aguzzi had also discovered other lab members who may have been cutting corners before any papers listing them were published.<\/p>\n \u201cMost of my people were rigorous and truthful,\u201d Aguzzi says, referring to former students. \u201cFor some others, I have serious doubts, but I was never able to prove my suspicions.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n Aguzzi declined to name the people he accuses of fabricating data, citing legal concerns.\u00a0<\/p>\n \n Even though [Aguzzi] hasn\u2019t perhaps done the manipulation himself, he was without doubt negligent. <\/p>\n \u2014 <\/p>\n \u2014 Still, Aguzzi says, he is disappointed that those he considers responsible for the errors faced no consequences. He claimed that the university decided to investigate only him because, of all the implicated people, he was the only person who still worked there. (Aguzzi retired in January but noted in his statement that he will continue to conduct not-for-profit research via a public-good foundation.)<\/p>\n \n E<\/p>\n lisabeth Bik, a well-known research integrity expert<\/a> who is one of the researchers who contributed to the dossier, told The Transmitter she is unsatisfied with the probe\u2019s outcome.\u00a0<\/p>\n Because Aguzzi is the corresponding author on many of the papers, \u201che is responsible for the integrity of those papers,\u201d Bik says. \u201cEven though he hasn\u2019t perhaps done the manipulation himself, he was without doubt negligent.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n Bik is also unhappy with the University of Zurich for not investigating Aguzzi\u2019s co-authors and not explicitly stating which papers should be retracted. \u201cThat\u2019s the least they could do for the scientific community,\u201d she says.\u00a0<\/p>\n Wolfgang Ernst<\/a>, a legal scholar at the University of Zurich and the University of Oxford who carried out the investigation, didn\u2019t reply to requests for comment.<\/p>\n According to the Retraction Watch database<\/a>, two papers co-authored by Aguzzi have been retracted\u2014both within the past two years.\u00a0<\/p>\n One of those was retracted<\/a> by The Journal of Neuroscience last year over image-related problems following a probe at the University of Minnesota, which resulted in neuroscientist Sylvain Lesn\u00e9<\/a>, Aguzzi\u2019s co-author, resigning from his tenured professorship<\/a> at the institution in February 2025. That study has been cited 287 times, according to Clarivate\u2019s Web of Science.\u00a0<\/p>\n For this study, Aguzzi says he had a \u201cminimal role,\u201d contributing a transgenic mouse for the experiment. \u201cI was offered an authorship, and I didn\u2019t refuse it,\u201d he recalls.\u00a0<\/p>\n The other retracted paper\u2014which the journal pulled in 2024<\/a> over image-related problems\u2014was originally published in PLOS Pathogens in 2011 and lists Aguzzi as the last author. The study, which explored whether mice can be infected via aerosols, has 53 citations.\u00a0<\/p>\n In a PubPeer thread<\/a> about the PLOS Pathogens paper, Aguzzi noted in a reply in July 2013 that his policy has been to keep raw data for at least 10 years. \u201cI have requested my coworkers (and former coworkers) to retrieve all primary data, and I promise that we will conduct a thorough internal audit,\u201d Aguzzi wrote on PubPeer at the time.\u00a0<\/p>\n A 2023 preprint paper co-authored by Aguzzi was withdrawn<\/a>, citing \u201cseveral irregularities.\u201d Other papers<\/a> by Aguzzi have also had corrections<\/a> or errata issued for them.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n According to Aguzzi\u2019s statement, the University of Zurich has now recommended \u201cclearer documentation, routine preservation of primary data, systematic screening of figures before submission, and independent verification of especially consequential results.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Neuropathologist Adriano Aguzzi has been cleared of research misconduct and negligence in a probe of 36 studies he…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":682404,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[7],"tags":[59,90,56,54,55],"class_list":["post-682403","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-science","tag-gb","tag-science","tag-uk","tag-united-kingdom","tag-unitedkingdom"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/682403","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=682403"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/682403\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/682404"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=682403"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=682403"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=682403"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
\n Elisabeth Bik <\/p>\n