Former UVM Researcher Admits to Fraud A former University of Vermont researcher has admitted to altering and fabricating research results for a decade. In that time, he received $2.9 million in federal research funding (mostly NIH). The actual findings are listed here. There have been a number of recent, high-profile scandals involving researchers of several different disciplines. Are these outings of plagiarism and fraud proof that the system works, or does the review/refereeing process need tweaking or an overhaul?

As for myself, I think it's proof that the system works and at most may require some tweaking. What that tweaking should be I don't feel qualified to address. I am rather more concerned about the scientific rigor addressed at a place like this.