Seattle Newspaper for the People by the People


Admin - page 29

Admin has 363 articles published.

Is this 17 Year-Old Korean Ph.D. Student a Plagiarist?

Yoo-geun Song turns 18 next week.

South Korean prodigy Yoo-geun Song is 17 years-old and about to complete his Ph.D. in astrophysics. The boy genius, along with his dissertation adviser Seok Jae Park, co-authored an article published last month in The Astrophysical Journal, but regrettably, the article closely matches a book chapter published in 2002. The chapter is not cited in the new article.

The recently-published article is entitled “Axisymmetric, Nonstationary Black Hole Magnetospheres: Revisited,” and it was published in October 2015 (vol. 812.1) in The Astrophysical Journal. Here’s evidence of the matching text:

The introduction to the 2015 article.
The introduction to the 2002 book chapter.

The first image above shows the recent article. The second image is copied from a book chapter entitled “Stationary versus Nonstationary Force-Free Black Hole Magnetospheres.” The chapter appears in a book called Black Hole Astrophysics 2002, published by World Scientific. The chapter’s sole author is Song’s adviser, Seok Jae Park.

Here’s additional evidence:

The abstract from the 2015 article.
The abstract from the 2002 book chapter.

I note that the title of the article published last month has the word “Revisited” at the end. However, the article does not cite the 2002 book chapter, and the text and equations in the new article are presented as original.

The author instructions for the American Astronomical Society, publisher of The Astrophysical Journal, state, “Articles published in the journals of the American Astronomical Society (AAS) present the results of significant original research that have not been published previously.”

The new article has updated references and an additional conclusion. There are additional, minor changes, but the bulk of the text and equations in the 2015 article appear to duplicate the 2002 work.

I have emailed the AAS and requested an investigation. The journal has not yet had sufficient time to investigate the case, and I’m sure AAS will handle it properly. My concern is not with the journal but with the paper’s authors. An additional complication is that the editor of The Astrophysical Journal, Ethan Vishniac, has co-authored at least one paper with the boy’s dissertation adviser, Seok Jae Park.

Song — who according to Wikipedia started university at age eight — is set to begin work as a post-doc after he graduates with his astrophysics Ph.D. in February. Let’s hope he gets some better advising.

By: Jeffrey Beall
Follow on Twitter
Source: Scholarly Open Access

Two New Pay-to-Publish Startups: SciRes Literature and Gavin Publishers

The logo and tagline for SciRes Literature (left) and a journal cover image from Gavin Publishers (right).

The system of payments from authors is spurring the creation of many new companies seeking researchers’ money, especially grant-funded researchers. Many of these new companies are pay-to-publish scholarly publishers, including these two, SciRes Literature and Gavin Publishers.

SciRes Literature

Let’s start with SciRes Literature, which — apparently — is short for Scientific Research Literature. Its tagline is “Profound source of knowledge.” None of its journals has any published articles yet, so at the present time, this publisher is a profound source of nothing.

SciRes Literature launched with 28 journals, all in the biomedical sciences, and all in fields already super-saturated with existing subscription and open-access journals, fields like cardiology and surgery. None of the journals fills any gap.

The “Contact” links on the website don’t work, and I cannot determine where this publisher is based. The domain-name data shows a Salinas, California address, possibly making this Monterey County’s first predatory publisher, but in fact it’s probably not really based there.

I suspect the publisher is really based in South Asia, and the owner likely has dreams of quick and easy riches from the gold OA publishing business. Good luck with that.

Gavin Journals

This publisher uses Open Journal Systems, the open-source journal management software from the British Columbia-based, collectivist organization called Public Knowledge Project. Open Journal Systems is a predatory publisher favorite.

Gavin Journals is a particular shabby and dull implementation of the open-source software. It’s minimalist and uninspired, likely using all the default settings. It has some of the very worst journal cover images I’ve ever seen. Here’s a particularly dumb one:

One of the worst journal cover images I’ve ever seen.

What emergency medicine researcher would want to submit his or her work to such an amateurish-looking journal? Probably none, and I suspect Gavin Publishers was set up by someone who is following an open-access publisher recipe, quickly setting up a site, eager to start spamming for articles and processing credit card payments.

They don’t explain the “Gavin” in Gavin Publishers. The publisher lists its contact address [exactly] like this:

5911 Oakridge way,
Illinois – 60532

That’s not how we format addresses in the U.S. This location is in a residential neighborhood, making this yet another Illinois-based questionable publisher based on a tree-lined, residential street. Gavin is now spamming for editorial board members, the spam emails signed by “Keisha Snyder.”

In the coming weeks, many thousands of researchers around the world will probably receive spam emails from SciRes Literature and Gavin Publishers. When yours arrive, I recommend you delete them.

Appendix 1: List of SciRes Literature journals as of 2015-10-17
1.SRL Alzheimer’s & Parkinson’s Disease
2.SRL Anesthesia
3.SRL Biotechnology & Bioengineering
4.SRL Cancer & Cellular Biology
5.SRL Cardiology (SRL Cardiology Therapeutics)
6.SRL Cardiovascular Diseases & Diagnosis
7.SRL Case Reports & Short Reviews
8.SRL Dermatology: Clinical Research
9.SRL Diabetes & Metabolism
10.SRL Gastroenterology & Hepatology
11.SRL Immunology & Immunotherapy
12.SRL Nephrology and Therapeutics
13.SRL Neurological Disorders
14.SRL Neurology & Neurosurgery
15.SRL Nutrition & Food Science
16.SRL Oncology & Hematology
17.SRL Ophthalmology
18.SRL Pathology
19.SRL Pediatrics & Neonatal Care
20.SRL Pharmacology & Therapeutics
21.SRL Proteomics & Bioinformatics
22.SRL Reproductive Medicine & Gynecology
23.SRL Stem Cell & Research
24.SRL Surgery
25.SRL Urology
26.SRL Vaccines & Vaccinations
27.SRL Vascular Medicine
28.SRL Virology & Infectious Diseases

Appendix 2: List of Gavin Publishers journals as of 2015-10-17
1.Gavin Journal of Addiction Research and Therapy
2.Gavin Journal of Anesthesiology
3.Gavin Journal of Cardiology and Cardiovascular Diseases
4.Gavin Journal of Case Reports
5.Gavin Journal of Cell Biology & Tissue Biology
6.Gavin Journal of Dental Sciences
7.Gavin Journal of Dermatology Research and Therapy
8.Gavin Journal of Diabetes and Metabolic Disorders
9.Gavin Journal of Emergency Medicine
10.Gavin Journal of Food and Nutritional Science
11.Gavin Journal of Nanomedicine & Nanotechnology
12.Gavin Journal of Oncology Research and Therapy
13.Gavin Journal of Ophthalmology
14.Gavin Journal of Orthopedic Research & Therapy
15.Gavin Journal of Pediatrics
16.Gavin Journal of Stem Cell Research and Therapy

By: Jeffrey Beall
Follow on Twitter
Source: Scholarly Open Access


Keith Fraser says:

October 22, 2015 at 9:13 AM

“Profound source of knowledge” – LOL. You’d think that people trying to make money by looking like a real scientific journal would put some level of effort into not looking like a crank echo chamber, paper mill or vanity press.

In related news, I found someone spamming links to a “press release” on a couple of LinkedIn groups. Close examination revealed the announcing institution (that’s supposedly discovered a miracle cure for all disabilities including “Down Syndrome, mental retardation, inability to learn, dyslexia, dystrophy, slow development, poor growth, hormonal imbalance, Autism, ADHD, genetic problems and many others”) to be almost certainly non-existent. Its website is an information-lite shambles with no list of staff or publications, an address that shows no signs of any institution of the sort, sections inexplicably written in Latin, and a picture of their building (supposedly in Kerala, India) that turns out to in fact be of a newspaper office in Manchester, England.

L_C says:

October 22, 2015 at 12:39 PM

Currently, SciRes Literature has also been diligently spamming for editorial board members. I believe that the founder for a site titled ‘Leaders in Pharmaceutical Business Intelligence’ (LPBI) copied the contents of such an email at the bottom of a post/site tab titled: ‘Praising LPBI’ (I suppose they saw this invitation as a positive?) This was the email’s signature:

Editorial Office, SciRes Literature
SRL Immunology & Immunotherapy
1692 Coastal Highway
Delaware 19958, USA

Praising LPBI

Also, I like that the full Salinas address of SciRes Lit, 200 Lincoln Ave, is actually the site of the Salinas town hall.

The DE address listed above, 1692 Coastal highway, is probably just nonexistent (plugging it into a GPS will land you in the middle of the road.) Several companies have claimed this dot of highway though, including Medicomat, a company that markets alternative health care devices (e.g., they offer stone therapy, phytotherapy, meta therapy, etc.), ships from China, and has a director (Nikola Anastasov) based in Novi Sad. It is possible that the SciRes Literature spammer confused this address with the more prestigious sounding Harvard Business Services address (which is 16192 Coastal Highway). I’m not sure if there is any connection to the publisher, but it does lead me to believe that someone overseas would be the most likely perp or person to make such an error.

Rocket Scientist, ScientificSpam DNSBL says:

October 22, 2015 at 1:47 PM

W.r.t. Scireslit’s whereabouts: the spams all came from a domestic Internet connection in Hyderabad, and the dude named his computer “PrasanthiPC”. We listed the IP and the domains.

Fake journals: ‘Make in India’ gone wrong
The Hindu – October 25, 2015

“A scam of the most scholarly kind on the Internet — publishing “scientific papers” in fake open access journals (also called as predatory journals) — has become more insidious and grown tremendously in size. And tragically, India has singularly contributed to the cancerous growth of pseudo-science.”

“Even if science done in India has not grown much in the last few years, India has successfully played a vital role in polluting the scientific literature with trash.”

“The number of fake journal publishers based in the country has grown several-fold in the last 4-5 years. Today, as much as 27 per cent of fake journal publishers are based in India! And India has the dubious distinction of being home to 42 per cent of fake single-journal publishers.”

“Indian researchers publishing in predatory journals could be willing or ignorant participants. Either way, fake journals provide the best medium to publish sub-standard and even highly unethical work — plagiarised content with falsified and/or fabricated data and manipulated images.”

NB: The Hindu is the second most circulated English-language newspaper in India (Wikipedia).

mkoulikov says:

October 25, 2015 at 10:36 PM

Open Journal Systems is a predatory publisher favorite.

For what it’s worth, OJS is also used by plenty of non-predatory publishers, across many different areas/fields, so in of itself, use of this software does not mean anything and should not be a cause for any concern. Hell, I’d rather see a new journal use OJS than try to build a custom website from scratch!

billwilliams says:

October 26, 2015 at 6:01 AM

Good point, mkoulikov – OJS has been abused by predators but has also been a valuable platform for small but important specialist journals starting out in various fields I am aware of.

James says:

January 28, 2016 at 8:25 AM

Thanks for doing this diligent work to point out predatory OA publishers. I just received an email requesting that I consider joining the Gavin Journal of Food and Nutritional Science as an editorial board member. The journal still has not published a single article, and while address line is fixed to look more appropriate given its supposed origin, it’s still a residential street in suburban Chicago, albeit right next door to Benedictine University. The email is signed by “Chelsea Stone”. So they have tried to upgrade their look but it remains an outfit I wouldn’t want my name associated with.

b00kreader says:

July 6, 2016 at 7:51 AM

Thank you! Yes the Gavin journal covers are terrible and still no articles published both dead giveaways, however I did not think to look at the address (good call). I just got the “be an editor” email through my institution. DELETE

Myron Pulier, MD says:

August 7, 2016 at 6:32 AM

Gavin Publishers has cleaned up… not its act, but its address. Now the formatting is closer to US Postal Service standards, and they have a new representative (Emily Cooper). Apparently Keisha Snyder has moved on, or up, or whatever.

Nkosana Motsitsi says:

August 15, 2016 at 1:55 AM

It is shocking! I was asked to publish my case with them and I did. I refused to pay the U$500.00 THEY requested. My argument was that any fee payable for publication is stated upfront. I outsmarted them on that aspect.
thank you for the advice.

CrankyProf says:

October 27, 2016 at 7:37 AM

Yesterday I was solicited to join the editorial board of Gavin’s “Educational Research Applications,” The link to the editorial board returns a 404 error and most other pages say they “will be updated soon.” Then I came here and found your entry. Thanks.

Jonathan Perreault says:

November 28, 2016 at 8:44 AM

Dear Jeffrey, you can add:
Journal of Microbiology and Genetics
to the list of Journals from Gavin Publisher.

Here is the email I got:
Dear Doctor,

Christmas Greetings from Journal of Microbiology and Genetics

On behalf of our Editorial office we take privilege to inform you that we are in the process of releasing a Christmas Issue by the month of December, as we are releasing an Issue for special occasion we would like to invite you to contribute your valuable articles towards our journal.
Reviews/Research/ Review/ Case Reports/ Short Communication/ Rapid Communications/ Commentaries/ Editorials/ Image Article etc., are welcome for possible publication in this issue.
Related Topics: Microbial Genetics, Genetic Engineering, DNA Sequencing and Genomics, Virology, Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, Nano Microbiology. Food microbiology, Eugenics, Microbiology, Molecular Factories, Pathogenesis.

If you are interested to join in our Editorial Board, kindly let us know your thoughts.

We look forward to your quick response for the good scientific approach and study.

With Kind Regards,
Faith Stephen,
Editorial Assistant
Journal of Microbiology and Genetics.

Fiona McQuarrie says:

December 1, 2016 at 7:05 PM

I got an email from Gavin Publishers today. I haven’t had any prior contact with them. The email came with an article manuscript that had been embellished with the heading “Gavin Publishers – Journal of Education and Research”. The manuscript was an unlocked Word document that still included the author’s identifying information in the properties.

Here’s the text of the email:

“We are glad to invite you to review the article entitled [name]. We found you are the appropriate person to review the attached manuscript.

Kindly review the manuscript and give your comments accordingly whether to revise with major comments and minor comments or accepted the manuscript without changes.

We request you to give your comments on the manuscript within 3days from the acceptance.

Until and unless we get your comments we are not supposed to go with the further process of the manuscript, as your comments are very crucial for the processing of the manuscript.

Note: If you are interested to join in our Reviewer Board, kindly let us know your thoughts.

Hope to have a positive response.

Please do not hesitate to ask any further queries.

Looking forward for long lasting Scientific Relationship.

Best Regards,


CT says:

December 10, 2016 at 4:28 AM

Same here, just got an invitation to review a paper for the “Journal of Nursing and Women’s Healthcare”, published by Gavin Publishers (although no published articles are found on their website)

Publisher Acts Suspiciously Like OMICS Group

Another spammer.

The publisher Open Access Text (OAT) follows several of the same, questionable business practices as Hyderabad, India-based OMICS Group, leading me to suspect that it may have been acquired by OMICS. Currently in the middle of a massive spamming campaign, OAT uses the “my previous email” ploy, using emails to bait researchers with the promise of a fast peer review process.

Open Access Text claims it is headquartered in London — specifically at 36-40 Copperfield Road — but examining that address on Google Maps, one merely sees a block of apartments, an unlikely location for a real medical publisher.

Another fake headquarters address.

By my count, OAT publishes 24 broad-scoped journals in the bio-medical sciences (list below). Here’s a transcript of a recent spam from OAT:

From: Global Surgery
Reply-To: “”
Date: Monday, September 28, 2015 at 11:17 AM
To: Norman Sleep
Subject: Global Surgery

Dear Colleague,

Hoping that you might be busy and could not reply to my previous e-mail, I hereby make a follow-up. We would like to invite an article for the publication in Global Surgery (GOS-(ISSN: 2396-7307). Prof. J. Michael Millis is the Founding Editor for this journal and we have started this journal with help of eminent scientists from all over the world.

All submitted articles will be reviewed by Founding Editor-in-Chief, and we have a Rapid Review Process and Publication Facility which allows submission to be published in just over 7-10 days. Based on your recent contributions, it is a great pleasure for me to invite you to contribute an article to GOS.

I welcome you to submit the articles to
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Amanda Venis
Managing Editor

Dr. J. Michael Millis
Editor in Chief

The journal’s editor-in-chief, Dr. Millis, holds impressive appointments. His email signature lists them as:

Michael Millis, M.D.
Professor of Surgery
Vice Chair for Global Surgery
Director, University of Chicago Transplant Center Chief, Section of Transplantation Liver Transplantation and Hepatobiliary Surgery
University of Chicago

Why is someone with such impressive credentials the editor-in-chief of a journal that advertises “a Rapid Review Process and Publication Facility which allows submission [sic] to be published in just over 7-10 days”?

The spam email, which solicits manuscripts for a surgery journal, was emailed to a professor of geophysics, a seismologist.

Dr. Millis’ amanuensis is Amanda Venis. I searched this name in Google and found some evidence “she” might be associated with OMICS Group:

Amanda Venis, do you also work for OMICS Group? Does OMICS own OAText?


While I cannot conclude for certain that Open Access Text was acquired (or originally launched) by OMICS Group, I can report that some evidence points to a connection between the two imprints.

Open Access Text is included on my list of questionable publishers, and it’s a massive spammer. It may be associated with or owned by OMICS Group. I recommend that researchers not submit manuscripts to its journals.

Hat tip: Dr. Norman H. Sleep

Appendix: List of Open Access Text (OAT) journals as of 2015-10-01
1.Clinical Case Reports and Reviews (CCRR)
2.Clinical Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Medicine (COGRM)
3.Clinical Proteomics and Bioinformatics (CPB)
4.Clinical Research and Trials (CRT)
5.Contemporary Behavioral Health Care (CBHC)
6.Dental, Oral and Craniofacial Research (DOCR)
7.Fractal Geometry and Nonlinear Analysis in Medicine and Biology (FGNAMB)
8.Frontiers in Nanoscience and Nanotechnology (FNN)
9.General Internal Medicine and Clinical Innovations (GIMCI)
10.Global Anesthesia and Perioperative Medicine (GAPM)
11.Global Dermatology (GOD)
12.Global Hormonal Health (GHH)
13.Global Surgery (GOS)
14.Global Vaccines and Immunology (GVI)
15.Integrative Cancer Science and Therapeutics (ICST)
16.Integrative Food, Nutrition and Metabolism (IFNM)
17.Integrative Molecular Medicine (IMM)
18.Integrative Obesity and Diabetes (IOD)
19.Integrative Pharmacology, Toxicology and Genotoxicology (IPTG)
20.Journal of Integrative Cardiology (JIC)
21.Journal of Systems and Integrative Neuroscience (JSIN)
22.Journal of Translational Science (JTS)
23.New Frontiers in Ophthalmology (NFO)
24.Pediatric Dimensions (PD)

By: Jeffrey Beall
Follow on Twitter
Source: Scholarly Open Access

Article Spinning: A Plagiarism Technique for the 21st Century

Be prepared for article spinning.

Article spinning is an increasingly-popular technique for creating plagiarized scholarly articles that plagiarism-detection software doesn’t always catch. It involves using software to copy and rephrase a published scholarly to create a new article. Terms and phrases in the source article are replaced with synonymous ones. Here’s an example.

The first of the two articles below is the original one. The second one duplicates much of the content using the “article spinning” technique, replacing words and phrases with synonymous words and phrases.

Zai, M. A. K. Y., Ansari, M. K., Quamar, J., Husain, M. A., & Iqbal, J. (2010). Stratospheric ozone in the perspectives of exploratory data analysis for Pakistan atmospheric regions. Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 6(1), 45-49.

Mian, K., Abbas, S. Z., Kazimi, M. R., Rasheed, F. U., Raza, A., & Iqbal, S. M. Z. (2015). Study heftiness in the astrophysical turbulence at Pakistan air space. European Academic Research, 2(12), 15697-15709.


Here’s an example, showing the original article first, followed by the spun one.

The original (2010) article.
The copied (2015) article.

Text of example (original article):

“(b) For normal data, the sample mean and variance are the unbiased estimators of location of the underlying distribution. Most physical data sets are not normally distributed even after transformation, because the assumption of an underlying normal distribution is a mathematical idealization that is never met exactly in practice because large data sets inevitably contain outliers.”

Text of example (spun article):

“(c) For Gaussian data, the example nasty and alteration are the unbiased estimators of location of the Gaussian distribution. Greatest bodily information circles are not Gaussian distributed smooth after alteration, since the supposition of Gaussian distribution is a exact romanticism that is not ever encountered precisely in repetition since big data groups unavoidably cover outliers [10].”

Note how the phrase “sample mean” was converted to “example nasty” and the phrase “mathematical idealization” was changed to “a exact romanticism,” altering the meaning in both cases. There are numerous other cases of “spun” paragraphs in the article; in fact; it appears that most of the article is unoriginal and spun from the earlier one.

I am informed but cannot confirm that the listed second (and corresponding) author of the spun article, S. Zeeshan Abbas, earned his Ph.D. at the University of Karachi largely because of the publication of the spun article in European Academic Research.


European Academic Research, where the spun article is published, is an extremely low-quality journal included on my list of questionable journals. Its co-editor-in-chief is Ecaterina Patrascu, a Romanian I reported on last year when she and her associates launched the ridiculous journal American Research Thoughts (site down, currently).

I think European Academic Research is just another of Patrascu’s money-making schemes, and the journal’s publication of this rubbish article is evidence of that. Note that European Academic Research, including the bogus article described here, is indexed in Google Scholar, the world’s largest index of junk science.

Also, the spun article’s title — “Study heftiness in the astrophysical turbulence at Pakistan air space” — is nonsense.

Another complication: The Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, where the original article appeared, is published by a firm called Lifescience Global, a publisher also included on my list. On the journal’s “Previous issues” page, most of the links to earlier volumes and issues do not work properly and lead only to advertising, meaning most of the journal’s earlier content is lost, and many who paid to publish in the journal were ripped off. I accessed the 2010 article discussed here through an archived copy in Research Gate.

Article spinning is chiefly used as a dishonest tool for search engine optimization (SEO). There are software packages and websites that will spin text for free in some cases. Its use as described here is a re-purposing of the technique and offers researchers a way to get scholarly publications without having to do any real work.

By: Jeffrey Beall
Follow on Twitter
Source: Scholarly Open Access


Nils says:

September 22, 2015 at 9:48 AM

The spun version makes about as much sense as a paper produced with SCIgen. Had the plagiarized article been properly peer-reviewed, it would never have been published.

Ellie fant says:

September 22, 2015 at 6:20 PM

I don’t get it, who are these authors (Mian, K., Abbas, S. Z., Kazimi, M. R., Rasheed, F. U., Raza, A., & Iqbal, S. M. Z.)? And what do they have to gain? Are these real people or fictitious names?

Nils says:

September 23, 2015 at 3:35 AM

Apparently, in certain countries, benefits such as faculty positions and/or income are directly linked to the number of publications, irrespective of these publications’ quality. It is quite possible that these are real people.

L_C says:

September 23, 2015 at 11:19 AM

You can usually find each of them listed on their corresponding University’s website where they will be listed as faculty under their respective departments. In this instance, almost all of the authors from both papers have an affiliation with the University of Karachi (either as a professor (a significant proportion of the professors at this school are former Karachi PhD students) or a former PhD student). In fact, they both even have factually who work in the same department, notably the Institute of Space & Planetary Astrophysics. So, one may question the extent to which the original authors are ignorant of the plagiarism. The copiers purposely chose this paper, a paper connected with their University, their departments, and their colleagues. Also, they all seem to frequently publish with one another. For instance, the first author of the original paper, M. Ayub Khan Yousuf Zai, has published articles with Khusro Mian, one of the authors from the second nonsense paper. They are all appear connected to the extent that, if one author were to be investigated for plagiarism, they may all be subject to scrutiny, which seems unlikely to occur. Maybe they all now benefit from protecting this practice since this would also mean protecting themselves?

Frank says:

September 22, 2015 at 10:13 AM

The quoted sections of both papers contribute nothing to science. What is this about Gaussian and normal? I work with statistics and normality is an assumption that these authors have to justify. Maybe some airspace is more “normal” than others.

Neuroskeptic (@Neuro_Skeptic) says:

September 23, 2015 at 5:56 AM

The reproduced portions of both documents donate zero to knowledge. What is this about bell-curve and everyday? I work with numbers and usualness is a basis that these novelists have to vindicate. Maybe some sky is more “as per usual” than others.

Neuroskeptic (@Neuro_Skeptic) says:

September 22, 2015 at 10:51 AM

The “spinning” method is also known as “Rogeting” – after Roget’s thesaurus.

It can be done either manually or via software. I’ve blogged about another case here.

Rogeting fools plagiarism detection software but it can be easily spotted by simply reading the text. The existence of published Rogetizations is proof of peer review failure.

L_C says:

September 22, 2015 at 12:37 PM

On a side note- I was glancing over the original article, “Stratospheric Ozone in the perspectives of Exploratory Data Analysis for Atmospheric Region,” and must ask why there are 5 authors receiving credit for this paper? It is merely a section copied from Muhammad Ayub Khan Yousuf Zai’s (the lead author’s) 2003 thesis: “A Quantitative Study of effects of Ozone Layer Depletion on Marine Organisms with reference to coastal regions of Pakistan.” I read both versions, but absolutely no novel information was added. There were only new typos, such as how the figures in the paper don’t correspond to their references in the text. For example, Fig. 5 is referred to as the Q-Q plot, instead of Fig.3. Further, Fig. 5 even has the exact same spelling error from its previous use as figure 2.1 from the thesis (shown in the Appendix). The word ‘appears’ is written as ‘apperas’ in the figure’s description. Although four more authors were added to this article, only the original typos, as well as new errors, make an appearance, and that’s about it.

The Pakistan Research Repository had an ‘Internal Server Error’ when I last accessed it, so I navigated to the 2003 thesis via the Wayback machine:

The paper is pulled from chapter 2 of the thesis and the figures can be found in the Appendix (chapter 7). If you try to open the PDF’s through the Wayback machine, they will not open. However, you can type in their actual address and they will open if you wish to see them. They can also be found here:
Chap. 2-

New Diagnostic Pathology Journal Copies Existing Journal Title

The recently-launched OMICS Group journal.

OMICS Group recently launched a new open-access journal called Diagnostic Pathology: Open Access. The title closely matches that of the BioMed Central (BMC) journal Diagnostic Pathology. It also matches the scope of The Diagnostic Pathology Journal, a new open-access journal launched by the former editor-in-chief of the BMC journal.

OMICS Group has a track record of launching journals whose titles match or closely match those of established and respected journals. OMICS then proceeds to trade on the ambiguity, tricking some paying authors into thinking its journal is the real one. It does the same thing for many of the hundreds of academic conferences it organizes.

OMICS Group is now spamming authors, seeking papers for the new copycat journal’s “inaugural issue.” The spam email misrepresents the true headquarters location of OMICS Group, declaring a Foster City, California address, instead of its true location, Hyderabad, India.

The BioMed Central journal, with its strong impact factor.

The former editor-in-chief of BMC’s Diagnostic Pathology recently launched his own journal, The Diagnostic Pathology Journal. Apparently fed up with the status quo of scholarly publishing, Dr. Klaus Kayser of Humboldt University, Berlin, took matters into his own hands.

Another new journal.

Dr. Kayser apparently became upset that gold open-access journals with higher prestige are able to charge authors more to publish in them. In his opening editorial in the new journal, Dr. Kayser asks,

“Some of the publishers adjust their publication fee to the citation index (CI) of the corresponding journal. Why?”

[Kayser refers to the impact factor as the “citation index.”]

—Dr. Klaus Kayser

Dr. Kayser’s new journal is not a predatory journal and is not on my list.

According to the BMC journal’s website, the current author fee is “£1370/$2145/€1745,” a high price indeed. BioMed Central journals are very expensive to publish in. Many are unable to afford to publish in BMC journals.

Clearly, OMICS Group sees the money to be made by publishing articles in the field of diagnostic pathology and seeks to profit as well.

The system of payments from authors has greatly damaged scholarly communication. To level the playing field, scholarly publishing needs a system that publishes research based on its quality, novelty, scientific soundness, and importance, and not merely on the author’s ability to purchase the publishing in a pay-to-play journal.

By: Jeffrey Beall
Follow on Twitter
Source: Scholarly Open Access


L_C says:

September 15, 2015 at 10:14 AM

They weren’t especially subtle about copying other aspects of the original BMC title either. Even their description is comprised of text copied (and slightly rearranged to hide the fact) right out of Diagnostic Pathology. For example, these are from their “About the Journal” sections:

Diagnostic Pathology: Open Access (copycat)-

“The journal of Diagnostic Pathology considers research in surgical and clinical pathology, immunology, and biology, with a special focus on cutting-edge approaches in diagnostic pathology and tissue-based therapy.”

“Diagnostic Pathology will provide an integrative journal for molecular pathology (biology) and digital pathology (virtual pathology), creating an open case discussion platform to be used during daily diagnostic work.”

Diagnostic Pathology (Original)-

“Diagnostic Pathology is an open access, peer-reviewed, online journal that considers research in surgical and clinical pathology, immunology, and biology, with a special focus on cutting-edge approaches in diagnostic pathology and tissue-based therapy.”

“Diagnostic Pathology will provide an integrative journal for molecular pathology and digital pathology ,creating an open case discussion platform to be used during daily diagnostic work.”

Note: The comma is out of place on that last section, so even their attempt to copy the phrase and erase the “virtual pathology” (that was in parentheses) from the original is sloppy.

Bobo says:

September 15, 2015 at 10:59 AM

You have the copycat and the original reversed.

L_C says:

September 15, 2015 at 3:30 PM

Right. Thanks 🙂

herr doktor bimler says:

September 15, 2015 at 2:33 PM

The latest spam from Omics in my in-tray is for a “Journal of Pharmacovigilance”. What?? Is this a thing?

Keith Fraser says:

September 16, 2015 at 5:13 AM

I guess stringing random words/concepts together is a good way to keep coming up with new journal titles.

“Journal of Post-Crystallographic Existentialism”
“Progress in Temporal Ergonomics”
“Nano-anthropology Letters”
“Bulletin of the American Pornocopian Society”
“First World Journal of Imitative Spectroscopy”

herr doktor bimler says:

September 16, 2015 at 5:35 AM

I would contribute to ALL THOSE.

Keith Fraser says:

September 17, 2015 at 7:35 AM

“I would contribute to ALL THOSE.”

Beware, I hear their peer review processes can be very exacting. Why, some issues have no articles in them at all because they piously rejected all those that weren’t absolutely perfect!

The Philosopher says:

September 21, 2015 at 2:53 AM

HI jeffry lookout for this site “”

Thank you for your service

Jeffrey Beall says:

September 21, 2015 at 4:48 AM

I agree. This site aggregates several hijacked journals.

Anomalia Klimatyczna says:

September 22, 2015 at 4:21 AM

Isn’t “Oceanography: Open Access” a similar case? Even the page looks similar:

I ask because I see a paper by someone I know published in this paper. I’m afraid this guy mistook it for the real thing:

The Philosopher says:

September 24, 2015 at 8:06 AM

Hi jeffrey lookout for this site “”

Thank You for your service

Jeffrey Beall says:

September 24, 2015 at 8:25 AM

Agreed, this is the hijacked version of a legitimate journal. I have it included on my list here. Thanks.

Large, New OA Publishers Continue to Appear — Two Recent Examples

The logos of Juniper Publishers and Cresco, two recently-launched OA publishers.

There is no slowdown in the creation and launching of new open-access journals and publishers. Here I briefly describe the recent launches of two questionable open-access publishers — Cresco Online Publishing (36 journals) and Juniper Publishers (36 journals).

First, Juniper Publishers. This publisher lists the following two addresses:

Juniper Publishing Group
Inext Ventures Inc.
3200 E Guasti Road #100
Ontario, CA 91761
United States

Juniper Publishers
Al Fardan building no 2
7th Floor, Flat no: 702
Land mark: Al Ghubaiba busstation
Burdubai, Dubai, UAE

The first address is that of a company called Mailbox Plus Virtual Office, a mail forwarding service. The strategy here is to make the publisher appear U.S.-based, when in fact it is not.

I think Juniper’s real address is the one in Dubai. This address is likely that of an apartment, meaning thirty-six science journals are being published by one man out of a flat in Dubai.

When I examined this publisher, no editorial boards were established, yet the publisher was accepting article submissions.

In fact, I learned about Juniper because someone forwarded me a spam email from the publisher soliciting editorial board service. Here’s a selection from the spam:

Greetings from Juniper Publishers!!

It’s our honor to collaborate with eminent people like you, after going through your profile I take the pleasure of inviting you to serve as an Editor for our JOJ Ophthalmology. We request you to kindly support us by accepting our proposal for being an Editor of our Journal.

The spam was signed “Christina Edwards, Assistant Managing Editor,” a name and title I think are contrived.

Next, Cresco Online Publishing.

Hastily put together.

This publisher launched before it was ready. That is to say, the website is unfinished and still contains Latin filler text. Also, its telephone number is given as “(123) 123 123.”

I also learned about this publisher through a spam email soliciting editorial board membership:

Greetings from Cresco Online Publishing.
Cresco is the open access platform for publishing scientific content online. The Journal under the open access platform publishes latest research content happening all over the world. The Journal Trends and Advancements in Biochemistry (TAB) accounts for the research in the field of Biochemistry and Biochemical Techniques.
All the articles published in the journal are peer-reviewed by our editorial team. Our editorial team forms with the combination of editors and reviewers in the fields of Biochemistry and Biochemical Techniques. We are in the process of forming the editorial board for our journal.

This one is signed “Emily, Editorial Manager,” yet another fake persona. The publisher purports to be based in New York, but it’s really based in South Asia.

The journals from both publishers are broad in scope and cover fields already over-saturated with open-access journals.

I recommend that scholars completely avoid associating with all 72 journals from both Juniper Publishing Group and Cresco Online Publishing.

Appendix A: List of Juniper Publishers journals as of 2015-09-04:
1.Academic Journal of Pediatrics & Neonatology
2.Advanced Research in Gastroenterology & Hepatology
3.Advances in Biotechnology & Microbiology
4.Advances in Dentistry & Oral Health
5.Aeronautics & Aerospace International Journal
6.Agricultural Research & Technology: Open Access Journal
7.Anatomy Physiology & Biochemistry International Journal
8.Cancer Therapy & Oncology International Journal
9.Civil Engineering Research Journal
10.Current Research in Diabetes & Obesity Journal
11.Global Journal of Nanomedicine
12.Global Journal of Otolaryngology
13.Global Journal of Pharmacy & Pharmaceutical Sciences
14.International Journal of Cell Science & Molecular Biology
15.International Journal of Environmental Sciences & Natural Resources
16.International Journal of Pulmonary & Respiratory Sciences
17.JOJ Biosensors & Bioelectronics
18.JOJ Ophthalmology
19.JOJ Public Health
20.JOJ Urology & Nephrology
21.Journal of Anesthesia & Intensive Care Medicine
22.Journal of Cardiology & Cardiovascular Therapy
23.Journal of Dairy & Veterinary Sciences
24.Journal of Electronics & Embedded Engineering
25.Journal of Forensic Sciences & Criminal Investigation
26.Journal of Gynecology and Women’s Health
27.Journal of Pharmacology & Clinical Research
28.Journal of Virology and Current Research
29.Journal of Yoga and Physiotherapy
30.Nutrition and Food Science International Journal
31.Open Access Journal of Neurology & Neurosurgery
32.Open Access Journal of Toxicology
33.Organic & Medicinal Chemistry International Journal
34.Orthopedics and Rheumatology Open Access Journal
35.Psychology and Behavioral Science International Journal
36.Robotics & Automation Engineering Journal

Appendix B: List of Cresco Online Publishing journals as of 2015-09-04:
1.Advancements in Electrical and Electronics Technology
2.Journal of Applied and Advanced Physics
3.Journal of Buddhism and Living
4.Journal of Business and Human Resource Management
5.Journal of Civil and Architectural Engineering
6.Journal of Computer Science and Software Development
7.Journal of Etiology and Animal Health
8.Journal of Information Technology and Telecommunications
9.Journal of Mechanical and Automobile Engineering
10.Journal of Pharmacology and Pharmacovigilance
11.Journal of Plant Health and Technology
12.Trends and Advancements of Biochemistry
13.Annals of Chemistry
14.Annals of Surgery International
15.Arts, Literature and Linguistics
16.Astronomy and Space Science Astronomy and Space Science
17.Advances in Clinical and Medical Microbiology
18.Cancer Research and Oncology
19.Cell and Molecular Biology Cell and Molecular Biology
20.Diabetes Research and Metabolism
21.Education and E-learning Education and E-learning
22.Genetic Engineering and Gene Cloning
23.Heart and Cardiology
24.Infectious Diseases and Vaccines
25.Journal of Food Technology and Nutrition Sciences
26.Kidney and Urological Research
27.Mathematics and Statistics
28.Obesity, Overweight and Bariatric Surgery
29.Neurology, Brain and Psychiatry
30.Oral Health and Dentistry Research
31.Plant Science and Biotechnology
32.Research in HIV and Retroviral Infections
33.Social Sciences & Psychology
34.Trends in Biotechnology
35.Trends in Clinical Research
36.Trends in Gastroenterology

By: Jeffrey Beall
Follow on Twitter
Source: Scholarly Open Access

Is SciELO a Publication Favela?

Open access.

Scholarly open-access publishing has little value when it’s effectively hidden and almost no one reads the published research. It’s possible for a scholarly article to be open-access but largely hidden from the world. Here’s how.

Commercial publisher platforms effectively help expose and promote published research. Publishers maintain close connections with libraries and very effectively distribute their content— both subscription journals and open-access journals — to actual library users, including faculty, students, and postdocs. Commercial publishers work with databases to ensure their published content is indexed. They add value to published articles by making it easy for citation management metadata to be easily exportable. The make available alerting services so researchers know when a new article relevant to their research appears.

Thus, commercial publisher platforms are nice neighborhoods for scholarly publications. On the other hand, some open-access platforms are more like publication favelas.

SciELO and Redalyc

The SciELO and Redalyc logos.

Meta-publishers such as SciELO and Redalyc aggregate scholarly content but do a poor job of distributing it or increasing its visibility, despite the fact that both services are open-access. Many North American scholars have never even heard of these meta-publishers or the journals they aggregate. Their content is largely hidden, the neighborhood remote and unfamiliar.

The Brazilian government is aware of this, and last year it invited representatives from six of the world’s top scholarly publishers to give presentations and bid on taking over the management of some Brazilian open-access journals.

The government knows that commercial publishers would do a much better job of exposing Brazilian research, and it wanted to take advantage of this, for the benefit of Brazilians. The effort was halted, however, when excluding Brazilian companies from the bidding process was determined to be illegal, a major setback for the better promotion and exposure of Brazilian science.

Thomson Reuters is making a new product available called the SciELO Citation Index. It may give greater exposure to content aggregated in SciELO, but how many libraries will license the product?


So, what’s the best neighborhood for one’s published work? There are thousands of unaffiliated, unknown open-access journals published all over the world that are very effectively hiding the research they publish, despite being OA. Their content is not indexed (except perhaps in Google Scholar, a database poisoned by fringe science), and it’s just sitting there with little value added to it. Much of it will disappear over time. Because copyright of the articles is retained by authors, there may be little future interest in maintaining, publishing, and promoting the content.

By: Jeffrey Beall
Follow on Twitter
Source: Scholarly Open Access


Michael Bragg says:

July 30, 2015 at 10:33 AM

SciELO is available on the Web of Science platform to support for search and discovery of this content

Shirley Ainsworth says:

July 30, 2015 at 11:54 AM

I am not at all convinced that the inclusion of Brazilian and other Latin American journals on ‘top scholarly publisher sites’ is any panacea. This year has seen a significant migration of them to Elsevier and to a lesser extent Springer, mostly maintaining their OA status whilst paying large dollar amounts for the privilege and services rendered. It is noticeable the number of Arab and Chinese journals that are employing the same ‘get rich quick’ techniques.

However their inclusion in important databases like Pubmed is indeed crucial.

For those interested, a new OA book “Hecho en Latinoamérica. Acceso abierto, revistas académicas e innovaciones regionales” edited by Juan Pablo Alperin and Gustavo Fischman was published this month by CLACSO

Anderson says:

July 30, 2015 at 12:07 PM

Could you please explain better your concept of Favela? Thank you…

Andre Serradas says:

July 30, 2015 at 12:52 PM

Maybe your post is useful to publicize SciELO and Redalyc to american researchers!

dzrlib says:

July 30, 2015 at 1:19 PM

As an aside, the SciELO concept is expanding:

“It is with great pleasure that I divulge the new Brazilian Portal of
Scientific Publications in Open Access (oasisbr), completely reworked. This is an important initiative of the Brazilian Institute of Information in Science and Technology (IBICT), and aims at gathering the Brazilian scientific publications in open access in a single search portal. Are scientific articles, books, book chapters, theses, dissertations and papers published in scientific events available in open access on the internet.

It’s almost 1,000,000 of Brazilian scientific publications in open access. The oasisbr has, today, in total, more than 1,200,000 documents because it brings together scientific production also present in Open Access Scientific Repository of Portugal (RCAAP)

lpanebr says:

July 30, 2015 at 1:55 PM

Scielo is currently undertaking the final steps in a major refactoring of all its platform. They now got all journals to send them near-JATS XML of the articles fulltext. Aggregating more value and promoting visibility is in the work and will come eventually.

Major international journals (eLife, plos and others) are already leaving the copyright of the articles with authors. What is the relationship of the copyright been retained by authors with the future interest in maintaining them.

Vitor Duarte Teodoro says:

July 30, 2015 at 3:50 PM

This a very controversial issue!
“Commercial publisher platforms effectively help expose and promote published research. Publishers maintain close connections with libraries and very effectively distribute their content— both subscription journals and open-access journals — to actual library users, including faculty, students, and postdocs.”

janerikfrantsvag says:

July 31, 2015 at 12:34 AM

I think you are pointing to an important problem with small, stand-alone journals here. Lack of publishing (not scholarly) competence results in low-visibility research, often of a quality that would merit better visibility.

Pero Šipka says:

July 31, 2015 at 8:43 AM

What about non-commercial OA meta-publishers, such as national citation databases providers in small, developing countries?

One of those, CEON/CEES that publishes the Serbian Citation Index (, adds more value to the papers than commercial publishers/aggregators: by providing standard visibility, searchability and downlodability, plus by normalizing author names and affiliations, by linking references both internally and externally, by checking legitimacy of references in all and plagiarism in some papers, and more. Journals are monitored, evaluated and ranked. Those violating ethical codes are suppressed or suspended more strictly and transparently than done by Web of Science.
CEON/CEES is a non-for-profit organization, and SCIndeks is an OA service. Journals pay the average amount equivalent to 300 USD a year for the whole job. Would any commercial aggregator do it?
I would say that the question of “publication favelas” (raised for good reason and quite properly labeled) is a matter of public responsibility, academic virtue, and business ethics, rather than commercial vs. non-commercial, or OA vs. subscription-based dichotomy.

Jeffrey Beall says:

July 31, 2015 at 8:48 AM

Few people in North America have ever heard of it.
I imagine it’s subsidized by the government, so of course the price will be lower.

SWUN Math – Company Overview

Student Struggling With Math

SWUN Math is a award winning education program focused on increasing mathematically student learning. Located in California and founded in 2011 by Si Swun. Their goal is to enhance the learning of all students. They work directly with schools and districts to make sure this mission is achieved. They provide training, guides, assessments, and regular meetings for their partners. They provide K-8 Common Core curriculum.

Mr. Si Swun struggled with math himself growing up. While learning the English language and being immigrant, he faced a lot challenges. Later he returned to the classroom and over came the challenges he faced growing up. He wanted to develop a math curriculum so others wouldn’t have to face all the challenges he did. In the late 1990s, Si Swun became a teacher and the rest is history. Si created a program to faced the many challenges he had to overcome (accents, language, ethnicity, to name a few). The program have been widely accepted in the state of California. Mr. Swun has been featured on the Colleague Alumni Magazine at Pepperdine.

Swun Math is very active and are “in this for the long haul”. Their passion is real and comes from a man who clearly understands the difficulties students are facing in the World today.

Quick Overview:
Company Name: SWUN Math LLC
Founder: Si Swun
Employees: 11-55
Headquarters: Cypress, California
Address: 10073 Valley View St #116, Cypress, CA 90630
Phone:  (714) 600-1130
Hours of Operation: 8AM-5PM (closed Saturday & Sunday)

Districts Using Their Curriculum:

Learning Materials / Resources:
Swun Math
App via iTunes
Books via

Popular News about SWUN Math:
Helping Students With Math – SWUN Math | Emerald City Journal
In the classroom: Students adjust to less-rigid lessons
Core Strength – Colleague Alumni Magazine

Popular Videos:

Belize Wrap Up: Thoughts on Traveling for Free

Traveling to Belize. Amazing photo of Belize from above.

I was in Belize, a paid trip by the Belize board of Tourism and I’m slurping down ceviche and broiled lobster and wondering about ethics. You see the point that became clear for me, in a way that only $200/night hotel rooms and free samples of Aveda shampoo can crystallize—is that there are no writers paying for this out of pocket. I don’t dare to do that math, but a $1000 flight, $200+/night for 5 nights accommodations and 3 meals a day that included apps and dessert (yes even for lunch) plus non-stop activities, air and ground transfers from one end of the country to the other, I’d say we’re looking a $500/day budget. Easy.

The big debate about travel writing comes down to semantics. Can you be objective if someone else pays the bills? To which I ask: does it matter if the check is picked up by your publication or the tourism board? Because let’s not kid ourselves. The writers in any glossy travel mag aren’t staying at spa resorts out of pocket. Someone else is paying. Does it make a difference to the writer if a PR group pays or your boss? Not really. It’s still free. It’s still a luxury that you couldn’t afford on your own. Does it impact coverage? Absolutely. But not in the way you’d think. Most travel writers aren’t approaching the medium like a restaurant reviewer. They aren’t visiting a location to covertly judge and measure everything and produce at 1-5 star rating. It’s about the angle, the story, the bigger picture.

In short, the story is the bias. I didn’t write about where we stayed or what we ate, but rather about traveling pregnant and my take on authentic tourism in Belize. I brought my own agenda and my experiences were filtered through that lens, not necessarily the objectives of anyone who arranged the trip. What impact did the insertion of public relations into my travel have? Access. Seriously. Sure, they probably made sure that my hotel room was extra clean or that they were quick on the water refills at dinner but I don’t write about those things. The biggest difference to me, as an independent traveler, was getting to meet the chef at each restaurant. Spending time with tour guides who were willing to be pumped for information. Having an after dinner drink with the hotel owner. Finding the stories that interested me.

Is it the only way to write about travel? Absolutely not. I could have spent the entire time in Dangria, following Garifuna drummers around and trying to learn everything I could about the African influence on Belizean culture, for $20/day. I would have stayed in modest locations, spent time interviewing locals and picking up as much Creole as possible. That has value. But it was interesting to me that what some people have classified as unethical, i.e. receiving “freebies” and not paying for my travel out of pocket, actually opened me up to stories I wouldn’t have found otherwise.

It reminds me in a way of the age-old traveler vs. tourist argument, which is really about purity. On some levels I’m interested in that, the idea of the pure travel writer, gritty and determined to experience it all and report back in flowery detail. I want that ideal, but it gets in the way of itself. It romanticizes hardship and scorns comfort. It assesses value based on obscurity. It frowns on name brands. To me, it seems that sometimes a place is well known because it’s awesome. Sometimes the obscure mountain village isn’t charming but a hell-hole. If you’re fitting the “authentic” mold then you’re conforming as much as the guy writing 500-word travel filler about his last cruise.

There was one thing about this trip that made me really excited for the future. This was a group of bloggers. In some ways they didn’t know what to do with us, and having done this trip, I have lots of ideas of how we could have used our shared resources better. But we are online writers. We’re not on assignment. We’re Twittering and blogging and talking about Stumbleupon and HootSuite. I think it’s a very exciting development, and hopefully we can figure out how to make it work beyond replicating the print model and inserting the word “blogger” into the itinerary.

Did I mention I loved Belize? The only side effect is my inclination to work the phrase, “You better Belize It” into every conversation. Maybe they did unduly influence me. Or perhaps there was something in that last bite of key lime pie. Totally worth it.

Trying to Find the Truth Behind the Bair Hugger Lawsuits

Bair Hugger Lawsuit and Safety

Recently, 3M’s normothermia system the Bair Hugger has been facing some legal issues. Lawyers all over the country have been advertising for people who have undergone a surgical procedure and faced medical complications post surgery. These attorneys state that they believe that the Bair Hugger is to blame, but is that actually the truth? Are the attorney’s promoting the class action lawsuits actually stating facts or is this merely an ambulance chasing tactic used to scare 3M into settling? Is the Bair Hugger really a faulty device like these lawsuits claim or is this a scheme to make some money? The answer to that question is that the lawsuits are merely an attempt for some of these law firms to try and make some money. The lawsuits are not based on facts but rather the jealous ramblings of a disgruntled individual who once was the Bair Hugger’s staunchest supporter.

It is important to start at the beginning when trying to figure how these lawsuits began to proliferate the mainstream media. The Bair Hugger has a long and successful history in the medical field and is still used by numerous hospitals all over the nation. To this day, numerous doctors and hospitals agree that the Bair Hugger is the best forced-air warming system on the market. Invented in 1987, it was an answer to numerous issues that a surgical staff once faced in the operating room during a surgery. Since 1987, it has been used over 200 million times in the operating room at different hospitals in the United States. The system has the largest portfolio of scientifically designed specialty products that allows doctors and hospitals to provide tailored solutions to uniquely fit each surgery. Each surgery can be a unique situation and the Bair Hugger system provides different options to cover all a patient’s warming needs during surgery.

Another reason why the Bair Hugger is so beloved is due to the fact that it is a simple and straightforward system. The system is used to prevent hypothermia during surgery. The system uses forced, warm air to help keep the body at a normal temperature while under anesthesia. The Bair Hugger temperature management system is comprised of warming units and disposable blankets. The warming unit is connected to the disposable blanket with a hose. The warming unit generates warm air, which is then forced to the disposable blanket through the hose. The disposable blanket, which is placed on top of the patient during surgery, is designed to let the warm air flow throughout the blanket effectively warming the patient. Hence keeping the patient warm and helping to prevent hypothermia.

Up until 1987, surgical teams faced the very real issue of a patient’s body temperature dropping rapidly during surgery. The first hour of anesthesia is critical. Patient’s undergoing surgery are the most at risk for developing hypothermia during that first hour. Some patients are able to return to normothermic levels post surgery but some people’s bodies are unable to return to those levels. Those patients whose bodies cannot warm up after surgery then suffer from hypothermia. Hypothermia can cause a variety of detrimental effects on the body.
Many specialists in the surgical field agree that the only way to help prevent hypothermia during surgery is to warm their patient’s body before and during surgery. Experts like Dr. Daniel Sessler, of the Department of Outcomes Research at the Cleveland Clinic in Ohio, is a proponent of forced-air warming in the surgical room. Dr. Sessler told Reuters Health in a telephone interview that, “Most patients become hypothermic during the first hour of anesthesia and then temperature slowly returns toward normal, so that by the end of the surgery most patients are normothermic, But the amount of hypothermia that we saw and the number of hypothermic patients was fairly high, and the amount of hypothermia was significantly associated with the need for blood transfusion.”

If so many experts, hospitals, and patients agree that the Bair Hugger is an essential part of the operating room, why are there lawsuits out there that portray the Bair Hugger as a defective product that can potentially cause surgical site infections? The answer to that question lies with the inventor of the Bair Hugger. As shocking as that sounds, the origination of the claims came from Dr. Scott Augustine, who was the inventor of the Bair Hugger. Although it seems illogical, Dr. Augustine made the claims because he created a competing product to the Bair Hugger. Dr. Augustine sold the Bair Hugger to a company called Arizant. 3M bought Arizant in 2010 and then successfully sold the product to hospitals across the nation. Dr. Augustine was on the board at Arizant but had a falling out over an undisclosed issue before the buyout by 3M. Dr. Augustine left the company on poor terms and then decided that he was going to create a competing product. Once his new product was finished, he immediately started a campaign to discredit the Bair Hugger. The origin of the lawsuits is really just a case of a disgruntled individual.

Once 3M heard about the lawsuits, they immediately sprang into action and began to conduct studies on the Bair Hugger to address the concerns that were raised. Even though the company knew at the time the basis of the claims were raised by the original inventor. A respected independent research group, ECRI, examined a study conducted by Dr. Augustine’s company and determined that the evidence does not justify discontinuing the use of the Bair Hugger in hospitals. ECRI also chastised Dr. Augustine’s company for mischaracterizing the results of a study that they conducted on the Bair Hugger to say that the Bair Hugger causes surgical sites infections. 3M also conducted internal studies as well that proved that the Bair Hugger is perfectly safe and the claims that have been made by Dr. Augustine were false.

Attorneys advertising these lawsuits have ignored the numerous internal and external studies conducted that prove Bair Hugger’s efficiency and safety. It is a product that has been trusted for over three decades and continues to play a large role in hospitals everywhere. It is important to know the facts before making assumptions about the Bair Hugger. Hospitals and doctors agree that the Bair Hugger will continue to be used in the operating room to help make sure that the patient’s stay warm and comfortable during surgery.

The Need for Forced Air Warming During Surgery

1 27 28 29 30 31 37
Go to Top