 |
 |
Thanks Charles for providing science education which is sorely needed today. Ray ----- Original Message ----- From: "Charles Scouten" <[log in to unmask]> To: <[log in to unmask]> Sent: Friday, December 30, 2005 9:19 AM Subject: Re: Stem cells > Science is inherently self correcting. The universe functions as it does. > If I announce a discovery to make rocks fall up, or that I can create cold > fusion reactions, I eventually need to publish how I did it. Since these > would be important findings (and why fake a result that is not > important?), other scientists will jump in to extend or disprove my > findings. They will first try to do what I did, but the rocks will not > fall up, because that is not what rocks do. Word will get around at > scientific meetings that nobody can replicate my results using my methods, > and the journal that published me will be notified. I will be > investigated, and fired, or at least my reputation will be besmirched, and > no results from my lab will have credibilty to anyone any more. > > Hwang Woo-Suk had to know this. He clearly has mental problems, or need > for immediate fame and gratification, or the idea that he could publish > now and find the methods to back it up later. Or found an error in his > reports, and desparately kept covering up with more lies. This happens to > politicians too, but it is not inevitable that they will be exposed, as it > is in science. In any case, as must happen, he was exposed. The system > has worked, we can look at the case and think of ways to tighten up, but > the defense is not against someone who will fool the world forever, but > someone who has needs or warpage enough to lie when he knows he must be > exposed and discredited eventually. We do not need to mess with the > system of peer reviewed publication, or investigator guided research > programs. Mistakes happen, and occsionally lies are told, but they self > correct. > > A commercial industry that lies about what it can do will evenutally have > to put up or shut up. > > The ethical breach of using employees eggs is serious, and not necessarily > self correcting, although it did get exposed in this case. Had the > science worked, he might well have gotten away with that if no one blew a > whistle. Some controls and oversight on procurement, or an audit path of > where important tissues and cell lines came from, may be in order, > especially at the frontier and high pressure labs in science. > > > Cordially, > Charles W. Scouten, Ph.D. > myNeuroLab.com > 5918 Evergreen Blvd. > St. Louis, MO 63134 > Ph: 314 522 0300 x 342 > FAX 314 522 0377 > [log in to unmask] > http://www.myneurolab.com > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Parkinson's Information Exchange Network > [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Bernard Barber Ph.D. > Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2005 3:24 PM > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: FW: Stem cells > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Editorial: Phony cloner > > Why Korea stem cell fraud matters here > > Published 2:15 am PST Thursday, December 29, 2005 > > Story appeared in Editorials section, Page B6 > > Can California's $3 billion stem cell institute learn something from the > misdeeds of South Korean scientist Hwang Woo-Suk? > > It can, but only if leaders of the Institute for Regenerative Medicine > take the time to publicly grapple with this scandal. So far, they have > acted as if Hwang is a distant aberration whose fabrications don't affect > them. Nothing could be further from the truth. > > > As a column on the opposite page notes, Hwang was once the world's master > "cloner" in creating lines of embryonic stem cells. Last Friday, he > admitted > > faking key parts of his research and resigned from Seoul National > University. > Hwang's methods first came under scrutiny when some of his colleagues > accused him of buying human eggs from his underlings, a breach of ethical > protocol. Now investigators are examining if Hwang broke other rules and > faked other studies. > > While California's institute can do only so much to combat scientific > fraud > - > the responsibility lies largely in the hands of peer-reviewed journals - > it can set standards for obtaining eggs and other biological material, and > ensure those rules are enforced. The institute's medical standards working > group is > > now preparing such regulations. Yet at their last meeting, on Dec. 1, the > committee's members went out of their way to avoid any discussion of > Hwang's mounting troubles. > > Why is Hwang relevant? Because up until this month, he led the world's top > lab in this field, and he supposedly had rigid standards in place. Now, as > we have learned, Hwang created a Potemkin Village of ethical standards - a > façade that he could display at colloquia that was as thin as a sheet of > cardboard. > > How did Hwang create that façade? How was he able to exploit it? What > institutional safeguards were missing that might have exposed Hwang's > fraud earlier? > > While the answers are still murky, the California institute needs to at > least start asking the questions - assuming it wants to avoid a similar > scandal. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: > mailto:[log in to unmask] > In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: > mailto:[log in to unmask] > In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask] In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn