Johan Duchêne

@johanduchene.bsky.social

Dad, Husband & Scientist | Immunology, Inflammation, Chemokines & Atypical ChemoKine Receptors (ACKRs) | Research & Meta-Research | University of Munich (LMU) Molecular Inflammation Lab https://duchene.ipek-research.com

Altered Antibody Validation Data on Vendor Sites Alarms Researchers. After several examples of undisclosed alterations in reagent suppliers’ antibody catalogues surfaced, researchers call for transparency to rebuild trust. www.the-scientist.com/altered-anti...

Altered Antibody Validation Data on Vendor Sites Alarms Researchers | The Scientist

After several examples of undisclosed alterations in reagent suppliers’ antibody catalogues surfaced, researchers call for transparency to rebuild trust.

the-scientist.com

I am sending an open letter to Thermo Fisher. Their response to my response to their manipulated western blot is bullying and petty. Yes, this western blot really is manipulated, it is unfair on me to say otherwise. I don't make those accusations lightly, and I have a (minor) reputation to defend.

Bild

The Thermo Fisher situation keeps getting worse. We've now collected 450+ problematic images presented as verification data in TF's antibody catalog. This includes: 🖌️ Dozens more images with duplications or painting 🖨️ Hundreds of blots that all share the same background (behold slideshow below)

100s labs ordered the wrong "p16" antibody. They wanted to study p16-INK4a, but bought p16-ARC antibodies. 312 papers got it wrong. Now the literature is polluted with false mechanistic pathways. As a reminder: validate your reagents. But also read the datasheet and use your brain.

Sholto David@sholtodavid.bsky.social · 2mo ago

Today I'm posting a new blog about an astonishing scientific own goal. Hundreds of papers have reported using a totally wrong antibody to investigate the tumor suppressor p16. This mistake has happened because scientists have muddled the names of two proteins. forbetterscience.com/2026/06/02/m...

Unreliable and underperforming antibodies are a longstanding problem, so while the reveal of apparently manipulated antibody data in Thermo Fisher's catalog was a shock, the frustration it sparked among many researchers is perhaps no surprise. My reporting:

Science sleuths uncover more than 100 suspicious images in Thermo Fisher antibody catalogue

Scientists have long worried about the reliability of commercial antibodies, and the latest findings have sparked fresh concerns.

nature.com

This is a very good question. Several other antibodies produced in my lab (X77 specific for Xenopus p53, for example), are also distributed by Thermofisher. It is funny that the datasheet showing the epitope was also an internal document. We suspect that someone in our lab released these clones.

Surprised to discover that Thermo Fisher appears to show a fake western blot for the validation of one of their p53 antibodies. I've added a diagram to show the very similar bands. This does not appear to be one of the "published figures" but their own internal data.

Bild

Another example of how technique variation can really matter. Here, another example of use of cycloheximide in ribosome profiling can lead to artifacts that affect interpretation. Really careful experiments to suggest that 2018 paper in Nature likely mistaken.

McManus Lab at CMU@mcmanuslabrna.bsky.social · 3mo ago

Happy to announce publication of a collaboration between my group, Neelam Sen's lab and Alan Hinnebusch at NAR combining FACS-uORF (MPRA) and Ribo-seq to clarify how Ded1 enhances mRNA translation. Great team effort! academic.oup.com/nar/article/...