BIOL368/F14:Class Journal Week 12

From OpenWetWare

Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

Chloe Jones

  1. Were you aware of this case of research fraud before viewing this video?
    • No, I wasn’t aware of this case before having watched the video.
  2. What are your initial reactions to hearing about this case?
    • I knew the treatment that they were presenting was fatly in the beginning, so it was kind of disturbing to see the video and the hope that they gave patients and their families. When hearing about the case it was unbelievable that somebody would actually alter data in order to appease a cure that they wanted to work. I was taken back that more information wasn’t checked before running clinical trials and the fact that it was able to be published in prestigious scientific journals. There should have been a lot more data and test runs before this theory gained so much recognition and gave people false hope. I just couldn’t believe that somebody could actually alter data at the expense of somebody’s life, and think they would get away with it. In the end I felt extremely bad for the people that were affected by the ignorance.
  3. What role did data sharing play in uncovering this fraud?
    • Sharing data played a huge role in discovering that the data did not add up. That is how they were able to catch the fraud; because if data was not shared it would just be solely based off the procedure he was doing which was obviously inaccurate and forged. Making the research available to other investigators allowed them to realize that things were having different outcome then what expected. Data sharing was essential in uncovering the fraud, because although they had got a tip that he lied about a scholarship, it was data sharing that uncovered the inconsistencies.
  4. What additional information would you like to know about this case? (We will be visiting it again in subsequent weeks in the course.)
    • I would like to know how he was able to get away with it for so long, and essentially have the opportunity to run trials. I would also like to know why the data wasn’t examined more closely before running the trials. Just in case this comes up again how could we differentiate between somebody altering the data and an honest mistake?

Electronic Lab Notebook

Weekly Assignments

Class Journals


Chloe Jones 03:46, 15 October 2014 (EDT)Chloe Jones

Isabel Gonzaga

  1. Were you aware of this case of research fraud before viewing this video?
    • No I was not.
  2. What are your initial reactions to hearing about this case?
    • I was shocked to see that this level of deception was capable at such a prestigious university. It helped reaffirm the necessity of replication in the scientific method, however, it's surprising to see that it took so long before this was replicated. I was also really surprised that he was able to lie about his credentials without being fully investigated.
  3. What role did data sharing play in uncovering this fraud?
    • Data sharing was crucial in uncovering the fraud. This allows for the replicability of the experiment, and thus others were able to see the manipulated data. Experiment replicability is integral to the scientific method, and thus it's necessary for bioinformatic technologies.
  4. What additional information would you like to know about this case? (We will be visiting it again in subsequent weeks in the course.)
    • Before the replication by Coons and Baggerly, what steps were taken to ensure the authenticity of the procedures before gaining approval to proceed to clinical trials?

Isabel Gonzaga 02:15, 18 November 2014 (EST)

Weekly Assignments

Class Journals

Electronic Lab Notebook

Nicole Anguiano

  1. Were you aware of this case of research fraud before viewing this video?
    • I remember learning about it during my senior year of high school, but not in this kind of depth.
  2. What are your initial reactions to hearing about this case?
    • I was horrified to find out that this was allowed to continue as long as it did, and that it ultimately led to the deaths of some of the cancer patients who were involved. It made me feel unsettled that treatments could be brought into trials with potentially phony details, even if there is a significant amount of suspicion surrounding the legitimacy of the treatment. However, while it was truly tragic for those who lost their lives as a result, this case caused there to now be a much more deeper look at the legitimacy and honesty of data in research, especially in research in which lives are at stake.
  3. What role did data sharing play in uncovering this fraud?
    • Data sharing played a central role in uncovering the fraud. Had the data not been shared, it is possible that the errors may not have been found. The sharing of the data allowed for discrepancies to be found, and for questions to be raised about the legitimacy of the data. It allowed for alternate experiments to be run to see if the data could be replicated.
  4. What additional information would you like to know about this case?
    • Like Chloe, I also wonder how he was able to get away with it for so long. It seems like, in the modern age, it is quite difficult to get a human trial for a treatment. How did he manage to get a human trial so quickly?

Nicole Anguiano 01:04, 19 November 2014 (EST)

Nicole Anguiano
BIOL 368, Fall 2014

Assignment Links
Individual Journals
Class Journals
Personal tools