Healthy Skepticism Library item: 15979

Warning: This library includes all items relevant to health product marketing that we are aware of regardless of quality. Often we do not agree with all or part of the contents.

Publication type: news

Wang SS.
Q&A: What PowerPoint Has to Do With Scientific Fraud
The Wall Street Journal 2009 Jul 14
http://blogs.wsj.com/health/2009/07/14/qa-how-do-you-find-scientific-fraud/

Full text:

Every now and then we hear about scientists who have committed pretty dramatic cases of scientific fraud. Last week, for example, a pair of researchers retracted more than a dozen papers based on animal studies of drugs being tested for use in transplant patients. The researchers claimed they removed both kidneys from monkeys in their, but in some cases they had left one of the kidneys in – a big difference.

The description of the case in the Federal Register mentioned a guy named John Dahlberg, director of the Division of Investigative Oversight in the Office of Research Integrity.

His office, part of HHS, deals with allegations regarding falsification, fabrication or plagiarism of research supported by funding from public agencies like the NIH. We gave Dahlberg a call to learn more about scientific fraud. Here’s an edited version of our conversation.

How often do these cases occur?

The cases that come to our attention are relatively rare. In the big picture, they’re extremely rare. There are tens of thousands of laboratories in U.S. We get reports [on investigations] of 3 to 4 per month; many of those don’t find research misconduct. We get 200 calls, e-mails and complaints from institutions a year with potential allegations.

How do you get alerts about potential fraud?

Most come through complainers or whistleblowers. They have personal knowledge. An increasing amount of whistleblowers are looking at images online. Up to 70% of active cases question images – blots, pathology slides, pictures, graphs and figures.

The oversight [of scientific data] is now vastly diminished. Even within the laboratory environment, many students and post-docs and scientists are not showing raw data anymore. They’re showing PowerPoint presentations. That gives the individual, if they’re so inclined, the ability to manipulate data right up-front. Unless a mentor is vigilant, there’s a real breakdown.

Who are the perpetrators?

Most are grad students trying to get a degree or post-docs trying to get a top-tier paper published. The pressures – they can be really self-induced pressures, or pressures from the lab – can be very intense. It’s much rarer, the pathological one who is a cheat that goes on for years and years. These are people who are much less honest with themselves and have the ability to deceive others for a long period of time.

What is the penalty for scientific fraud?

What we’re trying to do is protect public health funds. If the damage is significant and serious, we’ll recommend voluntary exclusion. It’s like a disbarment. They will not seek [federal] funds or spend them, including Medicare and Medicaid.

But if we do have a serious plagiarism case, we will recommend several years of supervision. Any [public health service] funds will be monitored by the institution.

When we do make a finding, unfortunately it’s with them forever, because of the Internet. Although we’re not real happy with the Internet being immortal, the benefit to science of having cases of misconduct publicized outweighs the downside in the big picture.