Comment by whizzter

I'm not entirely disagreeing, right now however there is so much fraud that when it intersects with things of interest causes millions(billions?) to be spent on chasing the wrong leads (see findings on that 2006 Amyloid Plaque paper regarding Alzheimers research).

I'm mostly saying that being reproducible should become a higher badge of quality, right now reviewers in cartels can boost a researchers credibility by accepting each others articles to papers to let them become "influential" and money is then redirected even more to bullshit research (ie pure waste).

If up to 50% of research grants is spent on bullshit research based on fraud, spending 10% by earmarking it for reproduction to weed out irreproducible fraud is money well spent.