science misconduct

[William L. Siler, Ph.d.]

From: IN%"keith@cvs.rochester.edu" 31-AUG-1994 10:14:27.97
To: IN%"SILERWL@SLUVCA.SLU.EDU"
CC:
Subj: RE: science misconduct

Return-path:
Received: from cvs.rochester.edu (swift.cvs.rochester.edu)
by SLUVCA.SLU.EDU (PMDF V4.3-7 #5070) id ;
Wed, 31 Aug 1994 10:14:05 CST
Received: from merlin.cvs.rochester.edu by cvs.rochester.edu
(4.1/MAIN-MX-1.4.3) id AA29621; Wed, 31 Aug 94 11:11:08 EDT
Received: by merlin.cvs.rochester.edu (4.1/CLIENT-1.3) id AA10682; Wed,
31 Aug 94 11:11:03 EDT
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 1994 11:11:03 -0400 (EDT)
From: keith@cvs.rochester.edu
Subject: Re: science misconduct
To: SILERWL@SLUVCA.SLU.EDU
Message-id:
X-Envelope-to: SILERWL
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT

What is wrong with the peer review that goes on during grant applications,
manuscript review for publication, and presentation at professional meetings.
These should fully disclose most frauds.

Keith Karn
keith@cvs.rochester.edu