In July, the medical community was rocked by a disappointing reminder of science’s weakest link: the humans doing the work. The journal Science had shared that its six-month investigation supported the findings of whistleblower Matthew Schrag, who first noted altered images in a high-impact paper on Alzheimer’s, published in Nature in 2006. That paper is still flagged on Nature as under review, but the damage has already been done. Alzheimer’s drugs for the last decade and a half have been developed around claims without as much evidence as initially believed—which might also explain why they haven’t been working, leading people to pour false hope into useless and often expensive treatment plans for declining loved ones.

Alzheimer’s latest drug and science journalism’s memory problem