from the mailbox: Science Faces Credibility Crisis

dec 31st

from someone on the ground in korea. see what i mean? this ugly pressure for results is encouraging fraud.

we the gullible public should not be so easily led by the nose.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: V.

Dear Rajeev

Prof Hwang has misled the whole science community. He
had no technology to make tailor made stem cells and
no stem cells are found in his lab. Next
investigations are towards his cloned dog. God save
him. SNU (seoul national university) might take back a
book published on Prof Hwang.

There were some supporters left till yesterday for him
but after the verdict by the panel they were in tears.

Journals are a big business. Science took only two
months to publish Prof Hwang's fradulent paper whereas
it takes six months plus for other papers. It seems
other journals were standing in cue before the Prof
after his publication in Science. They wanted some
share of his sucess too, although in other means, that
is money.

Good thing to note is Korean Scientists and
Journalists did a very good job in unravelling the
whole episode.

<>

http://times.hankooki.com/lpage/tech/200512/kt2005122916521411780.htm

By Kim Tae-gyu
Staff Reporter
U.S. journal Science is facing a major challenge on
its credibility after a team of investigators in Seoul
Thursday confirmed that there was no evidence to
support Prof. Hwang Woo-suk created tailor-made stem
cells, the cover story of the journal¡¯s May edition.

In a press meeting, the investigation committee at
Seoul National University (SNU) said that Prof.
Hwang¡¯s 11 embryonic stem cell lines documented in
the Science paper were all fakes.

Experts here say Science may have to share the burden
of criticism since the journal had printed the
fraudulent article without fully examining its
authenticity.

Many patients suffering from degenerative diseases
like diabetes, Alzheimer¡¯s and Parkinson¡¯s
anticipated the outcome of Hwang¡¯s work of which
reliability was secured by Science would help treat
their diseases.

``Most of the uproar has converged on Hwang, but the
scandal has also given a black eye to Science. The
journal will not be able to avoid its responsibility
for failing to check the legitimacy of Hwang¡¯s
paper,¡¯¡¯ said Park Se-pill, head of Seoul-based
fertility clinic Maria Biotech.

Park, who derived human embryonic stem cell lines from
frozen embryos in 2000 for the third time in history,
took issue with the exceptionally short review period
of Science on Hwang¡¯s stem cell paper.

Hwang presented the article to Science in mid-March
and Science decided to print it in two months. It
typically took about a half year for peer-reviewed
journals to publish a paper after receiving requests
because of the long review processes, according to
Park.

In fact, Hwang did mention Science¡¯s review process
in the May article during a breakfast meeting with
reporters held in Seoul on June 7.

``After we announced the establishment of embryonic
stem cells in 2004 via Science, many other top-tier
journals asked us to print the next exploits on their
pages, promising special treatment,¡¯¡¯ Hwang said
proudly at the time.

In early 2004, Science also published Hwang¡¯s first
medical feats of cloning human embryos and extracting
stem cells from them. No other team in the world has
ever duplicated the works and now the breakthrough is
also under suspicion.

``I showed some such requests to Science early this
year, then they promised an extraordinary process on
the paper regarding patient-specific stem cells. Then
the review took just two months,¡¯¡¯ he added.

Domestic embryologists assume Science might want to
retain the attention-grabbing research results even at
the risk of its time-honored tradition of assuring
accuracy through prudent examination.


__________________________________________
Yahoo! DSL – Something to write home about.
Just $16.99/mo. or less.
dsl.yahoo.com