What is going on now in Nature?
Within 2 hours of my emailing Nature Editors Campbell and Maxine about my manuscript (Manuscript No. 2010-05-06653) submitted to Nature that manuscript disappeared from the manuscript tracking system.
Why?????
Below is my email to Campbell and Maxine:
May 25, 2010
Subject: An important urge to Nature for doing some right things for science
To: Philip Campbell <p.campbell@nature.com>,
"Clarke, Maxine" M.Clarke@nature.com
May 25, 2010
Dear Nature Editors Campbell and Maxine,
As you both are very familiar with me I will not introduce myself and my past unpleasant experience with Nature any more.
Now I just wish to let you know that I have just submitted a new Communications Arising entitled “Partial recognition of incorrectly programmed stem cells (iPSCs) by Nature” to Nature (Manuscript No. 2010-05-06653 ) for rapid publication. I am writing to you to make sure that you two are personally informed of this new submission and will get involved in make a decision on it.
I should say that, after a great detour and approaching the end of this detour, iPS researchers have not confirmed most of my discoveries that were fiercely rejected by Nature and other top journals. However, despite my prominent place in publishing unique and correct insights on iPSCs and iPS reprogramming, none of my widely published discoveries have been cited by any later confirmatory studies published by the top journals.
The initial suppression of truth and the later robbery of credit have happened in an unprecedented manner and so far are still going on without any condemnation by the top journals. This behavior is more severe in a truly negative sense to science than the so-called “cherry-picking” in publishing a Perspective article in a hypothesis journal.
With this new submission, I urge you immediately stop some bad practices and come to a scientific and ethical approach towards a true pioneer and his outstanding discoveries.
To strengthen my standing in fighting against the residual mistakes and continued misconduct in iPS research and publishing, I am attaching my recent two submissions (along with cover letters) to Nature Biotechnology, too.
In addition, just to refresh your memory of some shameful past, I selected just a tiny part of my recorded experience with Nature and its authors and copy it after the end of this letter.
I hope you two will not waste this FINAL opportunity for avoiding dragging Nature into an irreversible path of degradation.
Sincerely,
Shi V. Liu MD PhD
PS
A tip of iceberg over
my experience with Nature
1. Nature’s removal
of my submissions without any notice and explanation
Case 1
From Shi Liu <svl8epa@gmail.com>
To Philip Campbell <p.campbell@nature.com>,
"Clarke, Maxine" M.Clarke@nature.com
Date Fri, Mar 19, 2010
Subject Please explain why my manuscript 2010-03-03056 was withdrawn by the Editorial Office of Nature
Dear Editors Campbell and Maxine,
It has happened several times before that my submitted manuscripts to Nature were shown as received and the disappeared from the manuscript tracking system. Very recently, this happened again.
The Communications Arising entitled "From iPS to iN cells: An expected turnaround in regenerative
medicine" was submitted on March 11, 2010 (see receipt below) but now is
nowhere to be found in the manuscript tracking system. I called Nature's office in
In addition, my submission of a Correspondence entitled "Off the brink into the abyss: a proposal to save the value of iPS cells" has also be neglected. I received no response for this Correspondence submitted on March 1, 2010.
I know that Nature has developed a very negative opinion towards me simply because I have exposed some mistakes and even misrepresentations in some researches that Nature has strongly promoted. But at the end of the validation of most of my insightful criticisms, why would Nature still deprive my right to express some right opinions?
By the way, Nature News has also deprived my right to make any comment on the Nature News website. Why would Nature do that?
Please give me an answer!
Sincerely,
Shi V. Liu MD PhD
Case 2
From Shi Liu <svl8epa@gmail.com>
To Philip Campbell <p.campbell@nature.com>,
"Clarke, Maxine" M.Clarke@nature.com
Date Mon, Oct 26, 2009
Subject My submission of a
Communications Arising disappeared from Nature,
again!
Dear Editors and Scientists:
This phenomenon has happened to me MANY times!
My submission to Nature was received and shown as "LIVE" manuscript with email acknowledging its reception. But later the "LIVE" manuscript was no where to be found in Nature's manuscript submission system, without any explanation!
Attached is a record of the most recent such incidence: my submission of a Communications Arising disappeared from Nature.
If you want to know why this happen, you may need to read my Communications Arising and my cover letter to Nature on that submission (both attached as PDF files).
I hope that someone will speak out on this and do a right thing to overcome this!
Best regards,
Shi V. Liu MD PhD
3 attachments — Download all attachments
Centrosome_20091026Sub2Nature_Day06_Gone2pg.pdf
CentrosomeCoverLetter_20091020Nature.pdf
CentrosomeInheritance_20091020Nature.pdf
Case 3
From Shi Liu <svl8epa@gmail.com>
To Philip Campbell <p.campbell@nature.com>,
"Clarke, Maxine" M.Clarke@nature.com
Date Wed, Jul 29, 2009
Subject What happened to our submission and why my comment was deleted?
Dear Nature Editors (Drs. Campbell and Clarke):
On July 24th, I submitted a Communication Arising entitled “Abandon an empty stochastic model and move towards a deterministic progress for iPSC research” via the online submission system, after I registered a new user account because my previous account was, for some reason, not working, despite my plea to you to restore it..
The manuscript was submitted successfully and a receipt was sent to me for confirmation.
The manuscript was assigned the following tracking number: 2009-07-08968.
I checked its status and found it was still shown as “received” at day 3. However, when I tried to login today to check, I couldn’t login. Then I received an email notifying me the change of my password by the admin. I used to new password to login but I did not see my manuscript in the system.
I clicked the direct link provided in the receipt email and that showed no manuscript, too.
So, what happened to my submission?
Please let me know ASAP.
Besides this incidence, my comment posted under Nature News “Mice made from induced stem cells”( http://www.nature.com/news/2009/090723/full/460560a.html) was also deleted. The comment is:.
· Can we calm down a little bit and see if the passage of some incorrectly programmed stem cells (iPSCs) may be a harmful thing to mice now and to humans in future? We now know that iPSCs are not "indistinguishable" from ESCs and many of Yamanaka’s "safe" iPSCs showed tumor/cancer formation (see details at http://im1.biz/iPS.htm ). Why the researchers have not systematically looked tumor formation on the IPSCs generated here in the Yamanaka way? Why the team wouldn't even reveal the details of the "abnormalities"? Is the higher than 97% death rate a real success or a great failure even in the reproductive cloning sense?
Can you tell me what is wrong with my comment?
Thank you for your attention!
Sincerely,
Shi V. Liu MD PhD
Representing all co-authors
2. Nature’s inaction
towards non-responsive “corresponding” authors
Case 1
From Shi Liu <svl8epa@gmail.com>
To Rudolf Jaenisch <jaenisch@wi.mit.edu>
Cc Philip Campbell <p.campbell@nature.com>,
"Clarke, Maxine" M.Clarke@nature.com
Date Fri, Nov 13, 2009
Subject Second urge for a response to my Communications Arising on your Nature publication (nature 10.1038/nature08592)
Dear Dr. Jaenisch,
I sent you yesterday my Communications Arising (presented in the very unusual but most direct way) and asked you to let me know if you will be willing to engage with me in a constructive communication that will become a part of a publication either in Nature or, as it often happened, elsewhere.
Now, to refresh your memory of what I had already discovered and now you confirmed, I am copying a list of my relevant publications here (Also see the attached file). I wish that you would not say that my discoveries are only in theory because you should know that “it is the theory which decides what we can observe” (stated by a great German scientist that you may know better than me). I wish you can read my publications very relevant to your “discovery” and find an opportunity to show your grace before it is too late to do so.
In addition, I insist that you will give my pass my communications to you to ALL co-authors on your paper and ask them to read and discuss my views. You should let me know if you are willing to be responsive within next two days and send me your intention by Monday (Nov. 16, 2009).
Sincerely,
Shi V. Liu MD PhD
---------------------------------------------------------------
Shi V. Liu’s Criticisms on iPS Cell Research (see the attached file
for better format)
Case 2
from Shi Liu <svl8epa@gmail.com>
to Shinya Yamanaka <yamanaka@cira.kyoto-u.ac.jp>
cc Philip Campbell <p.campbell@nature.com>,
"Clarke, Maxine" <M.Clarke@nature.com>,
Date Sun, Jul 12, 2009
Subject Important and Urgent!!! Communication Arising from your recent Nature Progress article
Dear Dr. Yamanaka,
Have you read our Communication Arising?
Now we just learnt that Cell Stem Cell had recently published a study which is entitled "Induced pluripotent stem cells and embryonic stem cells are distinguished by gene expression signatures" ( Cell Stem Cell 5, 111-123, 2009). In this article, the authors also stated that "the hiPSc state is not stochastic". So, we wish that, when you respond to our Communication Arising, you should also comment on this point raised in this new publication which we will cite in our revision.
But we wish you will give us an IMMEDIATE reply to let us know if you will respond us so that we will not wait for an any response as it has happened before, many times.
Thank you for your cooperation!
Sincerely,
Shi V. Liu MD PhD
Representing all co-authors
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Shi Liu <svl8epa@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Jul 10, 2009
Subject: Communication Arising from your recent Nature Progress article
To: Shinya Yamanaka <yamanaka@cira.kyoto-u.ac.jp>
Cc: Philip Campbell <p.campbell@nature.com>, "Clarke, Maxine" <M.Clarke@nature.com>
Dear Dr. Yamanaka,
We have written a Communication Arising manuscript criticizing your recent Progress article published in Nature.
We wish that you will give us your formal response within 14 days so that we can submit our manuscript in a due process.
Thank you for your attention and engagement.
Sincerely,
Shi V. Liu MD PhD
Representing all co-authors
Case 3
From Shi Liu <svl8epa@gmail.com>
To "George Q. Daley" george.daley@childrens.harvard.edu
Date Fri, Feb 1, 2008 at 5:31 PM
Subject Publishing of our Communications Arising and invitation for further debate
Dear Dr. Daley,
Nature rejected the Communications Arising that contains both my criticism and your response.
As suggested by Nature that "these debates are better pursued in full in the specialist literature", I have published this Communications Arising in Logical Biology.
Attached please find a copy of this publication.
I wish that you will read this publication, especially my rebuttal to your response. I welcome you make any more counter-criticism.
As the editor-in-chief of Logical Biology, I assure you that you will receive respectful and fair treatment when you submit your debate for publication in this new generation open review scientific journal.
Should you ignore this publication and choose not to respond, Logical Biology will also publish a notice to inform its reader of your decision.
Sincerely yours,
Shi V. Liu MD PhD
Editor-in-Chief, Logical Biology
SVL@logibio.com
3. Nature’s ignorance
on my proposal of offering alternative views
from Shi Liu <svl8epa@gmail.com>
to Philip Campbell <p.campbell@nature.com>,
"Clarke, Maxine" M.Clarke@nature.com
Date Fri, Aug 14, 2009
Subject Proposal for writing an Opinion paper on iPSCs
Dear Nature Editor Campbell and Clarke,
I have sent you recently a series Letters regarding my submissions and inquiries on their status. However, so far we have not heard any response from you or any other people in Nature.
Now, seeing more and more ill spins on the recent “Big 5” publication of enhanced generation of iPSCs (by knocking out tumor-suppressing mechanisms!), I sensed a need for me to write and for Nature to publish an Opinion paper on this so that at least a balanced view can be seen or heard.
If you agree me to write this Opinion, I promise that I will remain very scientific and objective in assessing others’ views and presenting our views. I will do my best to follow Nature’s style and insure this publication conform to all the normal standards of Nature so that it will become only an added asset to Nature not its burden.
I think this approach would be better than writing different Communications Arising as I proposed earlier. So, please let me know ASAP if you will grant me this opportunity.
Again I made my proposal in front (the email boxes of) many other scientists so that history can be verified somehow.
Sincerely,
Shi V. Liu MD PhD
4. Nature’s direct censorship on me and
discrimination against truth
From Shi Liu <svl8epa@gmail.com>
To Philip Campbell <p.campbell@nature.com>,
"Clarke, Maxine" M.Clarke@nature.com
Date Mon, Jul 6, 2009
Subject Protest against Nature’s censorship and demand for restoring my right for expressing scientific opinions
1. Recently, Nature has deleted all of my comments once shown for some Nature News. I also found that my new user account for logging into Nature News became useless. This kind of account locking happened before with my old account which forced me to register this new account (still under my real name, though).
2. Yesterday, I found that my user account for submitting normal scientific paper to Nature was also not working with my recorded username and password. This locking of my account prevented me from knowing the status of my two submissions listed below:
(1) “A severely over-valued success in “disease” correction with induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs)”. This is a Communications Arising submitted on June 23 commenting Raya et al.’s publication “Disease-corrected haematopoietic progenitors from Fanconi anaemia induced pluripotent stem cells” (advanced online publication 10.1038/nature08129; just appeared in July 2nd issue of Nature). The tracking number for this manuscript is 2009-06-07236.;
(2) “A misrepresented research finding”. This is a Communications Arising submitted on June 25 commenting Curran et al. “A soma-to-germline transformation in long-lived Caenorhabditis elegans mutants” (Nature advanced online publication 10.1038/nature08106; now in print at volume 459 page 1079-1084, 2009). The tracking number for this manuscript is 2009-06-07410.
I wish that you will personally get involved into investigation of the causes for the disabling of my Nature News and Nature manuscript submission accounts and give me some response.
I need the restoration of these accounts immediately, especially my manuscript submission account because I am going to submit another Communications Arising or Opinion paper to be published in Nature. This manuscript, which is attached here as a draft still being peer-reviewed by my peers, pointed out some major mistakes and even potential data fabrications contained in Yamanaka’s most recent publication in Nature.
I hope that you can objectively assess my submissions and reach some correct and responsible decisions on them.
Sincerely,
Shi V. Liu MD PhD