I grew up around scientific research. My father was an award winning cancer researcher, I did some low-level lab work for him, and later worked for the college of Pharmacy at Washington State University. The fact that something can't be reproduced doesn't mean the work was done wrong, or that the results are incorrect. New information is frequently discovered because different researchers get different results.
Here's a good example (I worked for a professor involved with this when I was at WSU). In the 1970's the big alternate medicine for cancer was laetrile, also called Vitamin B-17. It was made by a processing fruit pits, usually peaches. It was not approved in the US, there were a lot of clinics selling it in Mexico. (I knew some JW's that went there for treatments, they died.) The FDA was never able to reproduce the results some researchers claimed. What they eventually found was the the biochemistry of fruits from different places varied. Make laetrile from a peach grown in Walla Walla and you got a different chemical compound than you would from one grown in Yakima.
There wasn't any problem with that the scientists did, they working working with different materials. And since there was no established chemical definition of "laetrile" the results were never reproducible.