Key study on Alzheimer's disease may have been a FRAUD that could have impacted millions of lives

Some revolutionary studies act as a base for several other research and analysis are done. But what if the so-called base study is faulty or the material and data used are tampered with?

A similar case has emerged as allegations have been made that part of a vital study of Alzheimer's disease that was published in 2006, may have been fabricated. If the claims emerge to be true, then decades of Alzheimer's research may be based on deliberate fraud that apparently has cost millions of lives.

After the report, the research community is left shocked as concerning questions have been raised over the validity of the study and its influential results.

On Thursday, Science magazine stated that it has uncovered evidence that some images in the study, published 16 years ago in the journal Nature, might have been doctored. Notably, the study has been extensively cited in many reports.

Sylvain Lesné, who is a neuroscientist and associate professor at the University of Minnesota, published the study. The work of

The key research led to an understanding that a specific assembly of proteins might act as a promising target for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease.

The finding was treated a leading theory which stated that the amyloid beta protein formed sticky plaques in the brain that were the main cause of Alzheimer’s.

It identified a subtype of the protein "amyloid beta star 56" (Aβ*56) as the cause of memory loss in rats.

Dr Matthew Schrag, who is a neuroscientist at Vanderbilt University, voiced raised concerns last year about the possible manipulation of images.

Now, Science magazine said it found more than 20 "suspect" papers by Lesné and more than 70 examples of possible image tampering in his studies have also been identified.

The magazine claimed that the images on Aβ*56 by Lesné had been doctored to inflate the protein's role in the progression of Alzheimer’s.

As quoted by NBC News, Karl Herrup, a professor of neurobiology at the University of Pittsburgh Brain Institute, said the findings are "really bad for science."

Herrup who wasn't involved in the investigation, said "It's never shameful to be wrong in science A lot of the best science was done by people being wrong and proving first if they were wrong and then why they were wrong. What is completely toxic to science is to be fraudulent." Herrup works at the school's Alzheimer's Disease Research Center.

WATCH WION LIVE HERE