FR version is available. Content is displayed in original English for accuracy.
Advertisement
Advertisement
⚡ Community Insights
Discussion Sentiment
11% Positive
Analyzed from 702 words in the discussion.
Trending Topics
#https#cambridge#com#claims#academia#academic#issue#whole#situation#though
Discussion (50 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews
There are other likely victims here too though including those who were passed over for roles or promotions based on the alleged false claims, exaggerations and plagiarism. Those are harder to identify and quantify but still a very real thing that has deep impact on people’s lives.
I couldn't find statistics about postdocs or tenure-track professors, but this meta-study on PhD students and medical residents gives a suicide attempt rate of 0.8%.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S002239562...
> The overall prevalence of SA [suicide attempts] in our aggregate sample was .8%. These figures approached the prevalence of SA in Americans aged 18–39 (1.0%) and in the general population of adults over 18 (.6%).
https://retractionwatch.com/2026/07/27/cambridge-jason-arday...
https://ncofnas.com/p/dei-fraud-and-cover-up-at-cambridge
I don’t wish this poor man ill, and a huge mess has been created at every level it seems, all around him. Having read some of his contentious thesis the issue that arose for me, beyond the plaigarism question, was that it was generally hyperbolic and at points, word salad, unable to present a target that could be refuted or argued against. Zero clue what Cambridge were doing with and to this guy, or what the standards are for appointing people and critiquing their work if it’s feeding a prevailing narrative. I know John Moores, who awarded his PhD is far from rigorous and I know from experience that there is almost nothing that would have stopped them awarding him the doctorate once the work was complete, regardless whether it was plagiarised or didn’t stand up to scrutiny from anywhere outside of his small angle on sociological discourse. This all points to him being a symptom of an extremely widespread and serious issue that has arisen within British academia, not a cause of anything major.
I wouldn’t have wished him dead though, this is pretty tragic that the intense scrutiny over what should be a very niche and minor academic issue inside a university got blown up into front page news. He didn’t deserve or warrant that kind of scrutiny either, so has clearly completely collapsed from it, because it would be hard for anyone to take.
Reams of lifted passages look quite obvious.
https://www.simplypsychology.com/articles/narcissistic-colla...
Going by the astonishing tall tales he spread about himself, I would be surprised if it wasn't.
The following video is a psychologist's take, well, a YouTube psychologist's take on some of his many implausible, superhuman and grandiose claims that include:
Running 30 marathons in 35 days, notably running the final nine marathons with a fracture.
To have completed 600 miles of running in just six days.
Raised over ÂŁ5.5 million ($7.4 million) for charity.
(Time) travelling to Brazil on a relief mission where he personally installed water pumps for local populations as part of a program that shut down before he was born.
https://youtu.be/-RxoYfCiwX0
The University of Cambridge is largely to blame for letting this troubled person dig himself in so deep.
His astounding claims were astonishing and easily falsifiable. Journalists had no such trouble.
They raised him up then when he got too hot cast him down.
He was a fantasist, he deserves some blame, but it was Cambridge with the power, and irresponsible hubris
RIP