|
The Scientist: NewsBlog:
Misconduct from NIH postdoc
Posted by Elie Dolgin [Entry posted at 17th February 2009 02:35 PM GMT]
Rate this article
Sometimes the pressure to secure funds by Bob Smiley [Comment posted 2011-11-27 18:33:21] Sometimes the pressure to secure funds for research will push scientists into falsifying data to make their research look more promising than it actually it. There was another similar story about another japanese doctor who faked data in order to gain recognition in recent times.
Bob - LINK Research Misconduct is ignored within NIH by Jerry Cook [Comment posted 2009-04-30 09:07:37] Records obtained through a Freedom of Information Act appeal demonstrate that a negative mutagenicity assay is falsely attributed to the test article in National Toxicology Program Technical Report 494 to hide the biological significance of mutagenic contamination in the non-mutagenic study material (anthraquinone).
The unambiguous documentary evidence of misconduct on the part of several NTP researchers has been ignored by the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences and NIH. The Department of Health and Human Services Information Quality Guidelines have been rendered impotent by the unchecked ability of officials within NIH to simply ignore evidence that published information fails to meet the objectivity guidelines. Even the recently-appointed NIEHS director has chosen to turn a blind eye, probably because NIEHS also ?cares a lot more about increasing its public reputation than its morals? as suggested in the 2009-02-17 post below. The Director of the Division of Investigative Oversight at ORI has stated in a letter denying a request to investigate misconduct associated with NTP Technical Report 494 that ?I also note the ORI does not have authority to conduct the investigation you request. Our role is limited by departmental policy to conducting oversight review of investigations conducted by the institutions where the alleged misconduct took place.? Research integrity appears to be demanded only from those outside of NIH. When interns and postdocs observe cynical disregard for research integrity within NIH, why wouldn't they conclude that misconduct is a legitimate means of achieving professional recognition and advancement? Grant incentive are the problem by Stephen Boyd [Comment posted 2009-04-26 18:21:05] It seems more and more that the driving force to falsify figures is done so in order to get grants. Although this may not have been the case in this situation, it does provide a problem for anyone who wants to report it, but will not because they don't want to suffer the consequences. Until the financial incentive is removed, this will continue to occur repeatedly and "Ellens" of the world will never speak the truth.
Stephen LINK">Philadelphia Wedding Photographer What's really disturbing to consider is... by anonymous poster [Comment posted 2009-02-18 17:48:31] From this article, it sounds like the only reason why this case came to light is that the figures looked "very strange". What I'd like to know is, how many Photoshop users couldn't manage to fake a band on a gel? I mean, the folks at Adobe should hang their heads in shame... But it makes me wonder whether for every one case that is caught through sloppy editing, are there many others that are not?
Obligation by Curt Sigmund [Comment posted 2009-02-17 15:34:33] Each of you have an obligation to report such misconduct. If you are acting in good faith, you must be protected. How can you complain, if you sit tacitly by allowing this behavior. It's not that simple, Adam by anonymous poster [Comment posted 2009-02-17 13:47:38] In a culture where a whistle-blower, even if right and justified, is perceived as a troublemaker or a disgruntled loser, Ellen would be reluctant to do so. It is also a very draining and time-consuming process that most people do not find worth fighting for, unless too much is at stakes for them personally. The powers that be clearly know this, so they continue to commit and get away with their misdeeds and others just watch and keep silent. Trust me, I've been both a witness and a victim to a very unscruplous "scientist" at a major research university where such unethical behaviors are more of a norm than an exception, I'm afraid, because the university cares a lot more about increasing its public reputation than its morals. Report it Ellen by Adam Smith [Comment posted 2009-02-17 13:23:12] If you know this for a fact, Ellen, than you presumably have quite substantial evidence. It seems it is incumbent on you to report this. Why have you yet to do so? There would be more, and bigger fish caught if by Ellen Hunt [Comment posted 2009-02-17 11:42:02] The NIH has a CFR that sets the statute of limitations on such things at 6 years.
I know for a fact, that there are highly placed professors who head major departments at top universities who participate in such things in order to get their next grant. And I know that more than one person has been hounded out of science for the crime of reporting it, with the collaboration of the university administration. The administration will always do this, because they consider it in their financial interest to hush up anything that can be hushed up. All too often, by the time the person (usually a graduate student) gets to a place where they can report it, that statute of limitations has expired. And yet, the records are still available to check. This post-doc got caught because the professor was informed and was honest enough to pursue it. That professor should have checked the images better. I find it curious that such erroneous images could get by without comment. And I have to wonder about the timing of this, and what really went on. You see, I find it impossible to believe that the person who brought it to the professor's attention just happened to do it 5.5 years after the fact. From the timing, I suspect that a grad student knew immediately, but was somehow frightened into being quiet. I don't know, but I would appreciate some in-depth reporting on exactly how this really got exposed. It doesn't quite add up. Comment on this blog |