Fraud... what to do?

[CharonZ]

Unfortunately much in universities or research institutes (as spurious pointed out) is less about science but more about politics. That being said in many institutions there is an ombudsman, who usually is obliged to treat such cases confidentially.
One has to proceed careful, especially if one is in a weak position (as phD or postdoc), because in the worst case others might assume some personal motivation on cat's behalf to slander that particular person. Even worse because the first information was from hearsay.

 

[Reiku]

Whilst it is natural to worry about the actions of a freind, you must remember they have freedom as well. We can give advice, and help them in numerous ways, but the best thing above all for you to do, is to keep your friends best ineterest at heart, because that is what a freind truely means. I would remain quiet. Until the day (hopefully never) if any asks you about it, you will have decide then whether you should lie or not. Personally, i'm not sure what i would do. I don't what you should do then... :shrug:

Reiku :m:

 

[S.A.M.]

Unfortunately much in universities or research institutes (as spurious pointed out) is less about science but more about politics. That being said in many institutions there is an ombudsman, who usually is obliged to treat such cases confidentially.
One has to proceed careful, especially if one is in a weak position (as phD or postdoc), because in the worst case others might assume some personal motivation on cat's behalf to slander that particular person. Even worse because the first information was from hearsay.

Yeah, this is the most likely outcome without concrete evidence.

 

[maxg]

You could try passing the information along to somebody who would have more reason to bring it up (and less reason to worry about doing so). My own academic background is in English lit so bear with me if I don't understand the politics of science departments but isn't there someone in this individual's field at the university who has reason not to like the PI or the student and would therefore have no problem bringing up this forgery?

 

[S.A.M.]

You could try passing the information along to somebody who would have more reason to bring it up (and less reason to worry about doing so). My own academic background is in English lit so bear with me if I don't understand the politics of science departments but isn't there someone in this individual's field at the university who has reason not to like the PI or the student and would therefore have no problem bringing up this forgery?

That has nothing to do with it. There is a lot of quid pro quo within the department and even people who actively dislike each other, smile and pat them on the backs. Tenure and power in the department rests on goodwill and ignoring each other's shortcomings. Besides, no one wants to be associated with a department where such fraud was uncovered hence the likelihood of bringing it to light is dim.

The ombudsman is a good idea; he/she is likely to treat the source as confidential.

 

[Reiku]

If i still understand this, then i still beleive you should remain ever quiet, but also aware of everything.

 

[Baron Max]

That has nothing to do with it. There is a lot of quid pro quo within the department and even people who actively dislike each other, smile and pat them on the backs. Tenure and power in the department rests on goodwill and ignoring each other's shortcomings. Besides, no one wants to be associated with a department where such fraud was uncovered hence the likelihood of bringing it to light is dim.

So you're advising that professional ethics, fraud and even poor professionalism be ignored in favor of tenure and power and department goodwill?

Baron Max

 

[Baron Max]

If i still understand this, then i still beleive you should remain ever quiet, but also aware of everything.

So is that to say that we should all just throw ethics out the window?

I don't think I get y'all who advise such tactics. Ethics has to mean something to y'all, yet many of you shunt it aside as if ethics is just something to talk about in psycho-babble discussions. Hmm.

And yet, many of y'all are the first ones to jump on others for doing things that seem unethical to you ....like politicians, cops, government officials, etc. What's the deal? Is hypocrisy now in vogue in the world?

Baron Max

 

[S.A.M.]

So you're advising that professional ethics, fraud and even poor professionalism be ignored in favor of tenure and power and department goodwill?

Baron Max

I'm making him aware of all that his disclosure entails. The whole system is rotten and unless he has incontrovertible proof, no action will be taken.

That said, action has been taken before:

http://www-tech.mit.edu/V111/N15/balt.15n.html

http://www-tech.mit.edu/V111/N61/baltimore.00n.html\

When the National Institutes of Health concluded that data in a scientific paper written at MIT had been faked, researchers around the country found themselves defending the scientific process against a wave of public suspicion.

Last March, the NIH found that a former MIT researcher, Thereza Imanishi-Kari, fabricated crucial data in a paper coauthored by David Baltimore'61 and others. The paper, based on work done at the MIT Center for Cancer Research, was published in the scientific journal Cell.

Baltimore, who had staunchly defended the paper since its publication, asked shortly after the NIH announcement that it be retracted. He later apologized for his long-time defense of Imanishi-Kari.

Many observers believe the controversy surrounding the Cell paper forced Baltimore to resign from his position as president of Rockefeller University. It is well known, however, that many of Rockefeller's faculty were opposed to his leadership of the university.

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1173372

A task force investigating one of Germany's most spectacular cases of scientific fraud has found that the number of forgeries was more than expected and more scientists may have been involved than previously thought.

The task force, headed by cell biologist Ulf Rapp of the University of Würzburg, was looking into the fraud perpetrated by cancer specialists Friedhelm Hermann of Berlin, and Marion Brach of Lübeck. In 1997, they were found to have forged several publications and were dismissed from their university posts as professors.

Both of them denied any wrongdoing and accused the other person of fraud. However, a committee at Freiburg University, where Hermann and Brach had worked for several years, obtained evidence of their fraudulent practices.

The detective work was taken up in more detail by the Rapp task force, which was jointly financed by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (German Research Society) and the Krebshilfe, a cancer charity fund. The committee spent 18 months looking at more than 550 papers published by the oncologists.

Its report concludes that self regulation has obviously failed in the cases of Hermann and Brach. Of 347 papers published by Hermann between 1985 and 1996, only 132 were cleared of any suspicion of fraud. In 94 papers data manipulation was apparent; 121 papers could not be completely cleared and may contain wrong data.

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/307/5717/1851a
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/22/m...c940c4e7486a4ab5&ei=5070&emc=eta1&oref=slogin
This guy was actually known to us.

In the most extensive scientific misconduct case the National Institutes of Health (NIH) has seen in decades, a researcher formerly at the University of Vermont College of Medicine in Burlington has admitted in court documents to falsifying data in 15 federal grant applications and numerous published articles. Eric Poehlman, an expert on menopause, aging, and metabolism, faces up to 5 years in jail and a $250,000 fine and has been barred for life from receiving any U.S. research funding.

Scientists say the falsified data--including work in 10 papers for which Poehlman has requested retractions or corrections--have had relatively little impact on core assumptions or research directions. But experts say the number and scope of falsifications discovered, along with the stature of the investigator, are quite remarkable. "This is probably one of the biggest misconduct cases ever," says Fredrick Grinnell, former director of the Program in Ethics in Science at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas. "Very often [in misconduct cases], it's a young investigator, under pressure, who needs funding. This guy was a very successful scientist." Neither Poehlman nor his attorney returned calls from Science.

 

[Baron Max]

I'm making him aware of all that his disclosure entails. The whole system is rotten and unless he has incontrovertible proof, no action will be taken.

If he doesn't have proof, then it's nothing but rumor and blind accusations! And ethics still plays a major part.

I would also like to say that the system is "rotten" mostly because things like this have been allowed to continue ....by people who have no ethical standards, or they're willing to subvert their ethics in the interest of personal gain (or lack of personal loss). If you ain't go no strength of ethical conviction, then you ain't much of a person!

However, as I read his posts, I'm led to believe that he has proof. And if so, then he should do the right thing. If people don't hold onto their ethics, they ain't got much of anything.

Baron Max

 

[S.A.M.]

If he doesn't have proof, then it's nothing but rumor and blind accusations! And ethics still plays a major part.

However, as I read his posts, I'm led to believe that he has proof. And if so, then he should do the right thing. If people don't hold onto their ethics, they ain't got much of anything.

Baron Max

What you believe, what you know and what you can prove are completely separate things.

 

[Baron Max]

What you believe, what you know and what you can prove are completely separate things.

If you can't prove it, then you don't know it ....you just think you do!!

Baron Max

 

[Reiku]

Baron, you said -

''So is that to say that we should all just throw ethics out the window?

I don't think I get y'all who advise such tactics. Ethics has to mean something to y'all, yet many of you shunt it aside as if ethics is just something to talk about in psycho-babble discussions. Hmm.

And yet, many of y'all are the first ones to jump on others for doing things that seem unethical to you ....like politicians, cops, government officials, etc. What's the deal? Is hypocrisy now in vogue in the world?

Baron Max''

All I am saying that the law of knowledge allows ethics can be see undestructive. Psycho-analysis is a function with as many sides as there is possibility.
Mathematically this should be that Man is part of the inertial-mediation; a conscious existance.''

Reiku

 

[S.A.M.]

If you can't prove it, then you don't know it ....you just think you do!!

Baron Max

However, as I read his posts, I'm led to believe that he has proof. And if so, then he should do the right thing. If people don't hold onto their ethics, they ain't got much of anything.

Baron Max

:m:

 

[Baron Max]

All I am saying that the law of knowledge allows ethics can be see undestructive. Psycho-analysis is a function with as many sides as there is possibility.

Hmm, is that just your way of saying that ethics is just a bunch of bullshit, and people should ignore ethics if they want to?

And if so, do you hold that say feeling towards others who shirk their standards of ethics? ....politicians come to mind as well as government officials. Or do you hold them to a higher standard somehow?

"Everyone is equal, but some are more equal than others"???

Baron Max

 

[Baron Max]

:m:

As usual, Sam, you just bait people ....even if the person can't grasp what you're trying to say with a couple emoticons.

Just say it, Sam. Or are your convictions much like you've posted so far?

Baron Max

 

[Reiku]

Yes and totally not.
Work that out.
Ethics must be intrinsic.
The more than equal account for the non-renormalization of human behaviour...
Has Bush held much promise?
Has Bin Laden?
Or has Gorden Brown?
The last can be seen in light of Tony Blair. He was the one who united with America, an already unstable country. Mr. Bush is now the most powerful man ever!
Now that Tony is out of buisiness, Gorden will allow balance between us and Iraq.
How ethical is that for you?

Reiku

 

[Baron Max]

Yes and totally not.
Work that out.
Ethics must be intrinsic. .......

And then you launch into politics as if to answer why you have no ethics? Or why no one else should have ethics?

Baron Max

 

[spuriousmonkey]

The nice thing about retracted papers is that you can still put them on your resume! yay!

 

[Baron Max]

The nice thing about retracted papers is that you can still put them on your resume! yay!

You're so ethical, Spurious, that I can almost see the ethics ooze dripping out of my monitor and dripping down onto the desktop. I am so fuckin' proud of you.

Baron Max