Scientists are just a little bit more morally admirable than most groups of intelligent people. That, at least, is what C. P. Snow told a meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science 40 years ago. Whatever the truth of that assertion then, nobody aware of the record of fabrication, falsification and plagiarism in science could say the same now. What is more, some laboratories are so internally competitive that researchers are forced to keep their work close to their chest. Where that work is also difficult to replicate because of its experimental complexity or refinement, as is most particularly the case in biomedical research, you have the breeding ground for those grand misdemeanours that have led to hundreds of thousands of dollars of research grants being wasted, and, on some occasions, to even more costly legal battles.

Science is tough and is well able to survive such troubles. But public confidence in it risks being unduly undermined and the lives of innocent individuals can be ruined. Following the lead of the United States and Scandinavia, the scientific world is confronting the situation — although the United States also provides warnings of procedures to avoid (see Briefing, pages 13-17). How to deal with accusations, how to look after the interests of the accused and of whistle-blowers, how to correct the scientific record: all of these are issues where examples have been set. High on the agenda now is to spread principles of good scientific practice.

But there is too much reliance on whistle-blowers: systematic spot checks on data and on publication records deserve more effort. Burgeoning costs in the United States require a major rethink and streamlining of the handling of misconduct cases. And there is also need for a systematic study, by surveys if necessary, of issues of credit misappropriation, exploitation and inappropriate pressures arising in laboratory hierarchies. In short, the community is making progress in fighting misconduct, but has far to go.