Ah, perhaps I wasn't clear about what I'm trying to say. I don't think we should stop training researchers in common mistakes and fraudulent methods to watch out for.

I'm just saying: I don't believe anyone actually tells budding researchers that they should commit fraud. Instead I think the process is probably more like this:

Year 1: Statistics/research training. Here are a load of subtle mistakes to watch out for and avoid. Scientific fraud happens sometimes. Don't do it, it's very dishonest.

Year 2: Starting research. Gee a lot of these papers I'm reading are hard to reproduce, or unclear. Maybe fraud is widespread - or maybe they're just smarter or better equipped than me.

Year 3: "You really ought to have published some papers by now, the average student in your position has 3 papers. If you don't want to flunk out you really need to start showing some progress"