The editor of the journal Fertility and Sterility (F&S) is retracting his statements that appeared in a February article by The Scientist in which he accused Korean authors of an F&S paper of plagiarizing another scientist's work and lying to the journal about it.
In a letter on masthead from the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (which publishes F&S), editor-in-chief Alan DeCherney apologized for "the distress and any reputational damage" his comments, which appeared in both The Scientist and the Los Angeles Times, may have caused. The letter is addressed to Kwang-Yul Cha, first author of the F&S paper, and was forwarded to The Scientist by Cha's spokesperson.
In April, the British Medical Journal reported that a lawyer for Cha sent DeCherney a letter accusing him of making "false and defamatory statements" to The Scientist and the Los Angeles Times, which first reported the story.
DeCherney did not respond to requests to confirm either the letter from Cha's lawyer or the letter containing his apology to Cha.
In February, DeCherney censured Cha and his colleagues when he discovered that an identical paper to the one they published in F&S had appeared in a Korean journal under first author Jeong-Hwan Kim, whose name was not on the F&S paper. Kim claimed he had done most of the research reported in the two papers, which measured the mitochondrial DNA of women with premature ovarian cancer using polymerase chain reaction (PCR).
In his comments to The Scientist, DeCherney accused the F&S authors of plagiarism, and said they "perjured themselves" when they signed a note saying they had not published the paper in any other journal.
DeCherney also said he planned to add Kim's name as first author of the paper, but has yet to do so. In April, the ASRM retracted the paper. (The link to the abstract on Elsevier's Web site contains the word "Retracted.")
DeCherney wrote in his letter to Cha that after checking his records he discovered that Kim's name was indeed included on the draft first submitted to the journal. "I am not aware of the circumstances that ultimately led to his exclusion from the list of authors," he wrote. DeCherney said he also uncovered two formal requests made in 2006 that Kim's name be added to the list of authors, but to which DeCherney never responded.
"Considering the facts of the matter, I consider my references to 'plagiarism' and 'perjury' to be inaccurate and regrettable. I hereby retract them and give you permission to forward this letter to the authors of both articles, and to their editors for their information," he wrote.
A statement from Cha, sent via his spokesperson, said: "I think Dr. DeCherney made the right and honorable decision to retract his inaccurate and damaging comments. His apology is accepted." Cha did not say whether or not he would pursue legal action against DeCherney.
Kim told The Scientist that he is "really disappointed" in DeCherney's decision, and in the failure of Fertility and Sterility to add his name to the author list of the 2005 paper. DeCherney hasn't returned Kim's calls or Emails since July 2006, Kim added.
Kim is currently suing both Cha and Sook-Hwan Lee -second author of the 2005 paper --accusing them of stealing his research.
Andrea Gawrylewski
mail@the-scientist.com
Alison McCook contributed reporting to this article.
Links within this article:
A. McCook, "Fertility journal censures scientists," The Scientist, February 20, 2007.
http://www.the-scientist.com/news/display/52859/
K.Y. Cha et al, "Quantification of mitochondrial DNA using real-time polymerase chain reaction in patients with premature ovarian failure," Fertility and Sterility, December 2005.
http://www.the-scientist.com/pubmed/16359970
A. McCook, "New details in Korean plagiarism case," The Scientist, April 10, 2006.
http://www.the-scientist.com/news/display/53061
A. McCook, "Controversial fertility paper retracted," The Scientist, April 27, 2007.
http://www.the-scientist.com/news/display/53170/
Elsevier: Retraction notice
http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0015-0282(05)03333-9
Advertisement
Rate this article
|
The News |
|||||||
Register for FREE Online Access
- »Current issue
- »Best Places to Work and Salary surveys
- »Daily news and monthly contents emails
Subscribe to the Magazine
- »Monthly print issues
- »Unlimited online access
- »Special offers on books, apparel, and more
[Comment posted 2007-06-13 23:30:20]
Separately, some "factual" matters don't pass the straight-face test.
For example, if Kim's name were on the initial F&S manuscript, and no one knows how it was removed, then how did Kim's name NOT appear on the as-published F&S article? One guesses that Kim's name appeared, at best, as an acknowledgement in the original F&S manuscript.
Also, if Dr. Cha originated the idea for the work, and Dr. Lee was aware of the first submission to KJOG, how come Dr. Lee would not complain of the omission of Dr. Cha's name from the KJOG submission?
At this point, no one seems to be discussing the terms "duplicate publication" and "plagiarism" as they appear in the instructions to authors on the Fertility & Sterility website. Such a discussion would illuminate DeCherney's earlier comments.
For further discussion, see
LINK
and earlier posts on IPBiz.
[Comment posted 2007-06-13 20:12:12]
There are some clear facts toward the end of this article. A. The paper was published elsewhere first. B. The paper was published elsewhere with different authors. C. The lead author of the originally published paper is not happy and claims his work was stolen to the point of legal action. D. The editor has been served with legal bluster that appears rather questionable.
It is one thing to use the legal system to redress wrongs. This must be allowed and supported. It is quite another to abuse it in order to paper over quite questionable actions. Journalism has a duty to the public to expose probable abuses.
I am quite familiar with the realities of dealings in nations that have not lived by the rule of law, or are in transition. It is an unfortunate fact that for the majority of the world's people, the law is a method of oppression and coercion, not justice. I expect more from The Scientist than spineless skirting of the central matter when such methods of abuse invade our sphere. Such stuff is a rot in the system, and in the long run quite dangerous to us all. The corrupt know that boldness and bullying are their only hope. Such stuff must be opposed, and not with whispers.
[Comment posted 2007-06-08 20:13:31]
LINK
California Stem Cell Report
News, information and commentary on public policy and business issues involving California's new stem cell agency, the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine, created by Prop. 71. This Web page is published by David Jensen, whose background and email contact can be found on this page under oddly titled section, "About Me."
Thursday, June 07, 2007
Fertility and Sterility Editor Retracts Comments About Cha
The editor of the Fertility and Sterility Journal has retracted and apologized for his remarks alleging plagiarism and perjury linked to Kwang-Yul Cha, a South Korean scientist whose organization includes a Los Angeles lab that was approved for a $2.6 million California stem cell grant.
The May 31 letter was written by Alan DeCherney to Cha following articles in the Los Angeles Times and The Scientist concerning DeCherney's allegations. The charges received additional attention after CHA RMI in Los Angeles successfully competed for the CIRM grant.
Following approval of the research funds, two organizations that monitor CIRM said the news reports raised troubling questions.
Here is the text of the DeCherney letter, written on the letterhead of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. The letter was supplied to the California Stem Cell Report by a representative of the Cha organization.
"Dear Dr. Cha,
"I am writing to apologize for the distress and any reputational damage my statements to The Scientist (February 20, 2007) and the Los Angeles Times (February 18, 2007) have caused you and your organization. Considering the facts of the matter, I consider my references to 'plagiarism' and 'perjury' to be inaccurate and regrettable. I hereby retract them and give you permission to forward this letter to the authors of both articles, and to their editors, for their information. You may use this letter in full form publicly in any way that you wish.
"I regret that I did not contact you or the other authors earlier to determine the facts of the matter, since it was brought to my attention more than a year ago. Please accept my apology for my hasty remarks to the reporters.
"After checking our records, I acknowledge that Dr. Jeong-Hwan Kim's name was included as an author when the manuscript was originally submitted, though I am not aware of the circumstances that ultimately led to his exclusion from the list of authors. I also acknowledge the fact that two formal requests were made in 2006 (after publication of the article in F&S) asking that Dr. Kim be added to the article as an author and that I did not respond to either of them.
"I want to emphasize that we found no scientific fault with your paper: "Quantification of mitochondrial DNA using real-time polymerase chain reaction in patients with premature ovarian failure," published in Sterility and Fertility. In accordance with the press release issued by the Fertility & Sterility board in April, we determined that you were not responsible for the dual publication. While the Board did not consider the issue of authorship, I have no reason to believe that you should not receive credit as first author. This would be consistent with the customary practice in the United State of the Corresponding Author providing the appropriate authorship credits.
"We hope that this will not discourage you and your scientific colleagues from submitting original research articles to Fertility and Sterility in the future.
"Sincerely,
Alan DeCherney, MD"
Funding of all the grants approved in March, including CHA RMI, has not yet begun. CIRM is reviewing them all as part of its normal practice to assure that each grantee can comply with the terms of the grant.
If you are interested in a PDF copy of the DeCherney letter, please send a request to djensen@californiastemcellreport.com. If you would like to read more on this subject, we have posted a number of items in March and April. You can find by using the search term CHA.
Labels: CHA, grant administration, Grant-making, openness
posted by California Stem Cell Report at 5:09 PM