This is a report on a scandal in an obscure journal, and peer review has come under more scrutiny.
Although this is a fraud story, peer review is not as good as you would imagine, even in the best of circumstances.
I would recommend you consider that an even more pervasive form of misconduct or peer review corruption is incestuous relationships that develop around trolling for government funding.
I favorably review your article and publish it and you scratch my itch too. Tit for tat in academia? Naturally.
For example the club of air pollution researchers that are published frequently is relatively small, and not very divergent. Consensus rules, and social/economic/academic relationships influence things–so that a consensus is developed.
I know you all are aware of the Kuhn book on scientific paradigms–I get sick of people talking about how their new study will change the paradigm. The “paradigm” is often the product of a social herd tendency that academics have.
The Richard Feynman warning about the cargo cult science that develops in a social environment like academia is honored more in the breach. To our continued disadvantage.