Science Frauds I – Four Examples

Data falsification occurs rather frequently. What makes scientists lie about their results?

Almost every year, a new case of science fraud gets major attention in the media and threatens to compromise science’s credibility in the eyes of citizens. What makes scientists lose their professional integrity in the search for scientific recognition? Are scientists more prone to commit frauds than other professionals, or do we just blow up scientific frauds? In part 1 of this article, we describe four of the most publicized and controversial cases of scientific fraud.

1. Illegal use of human eggs

In 2004, Hwang Woo Suk, a South Korean professor, and researcher published two scientific articles in Science journal, claiming he created human embryonic stem cells by cloning. However, less than three weeks later, Suk was accused of data manipulation, falsification, and even more serious ethical violations. For instance, he was accused of illegally buying human eggs for his research and persuading several women to donate their oocytes without informed consent. Later, some donors were infertile patients who agreed to give their spare oocytes to research. However, they were not informed that their oocytes would be assigned a quality scale, with low-quality eggs used for their fertilization treatments and higher quality eggs set aside for research purposes. It was also found that some of the donors were junior members of Suk’s team and co-authors of the papers. In 2009, Woo Suk Hwang was convicted to a 2-year suspended prison sentence for fraud, embezzlement, and bioethics law violations.

2. Measles and autism

Another case of scientific fraud is Andrew Wakefield. In 1998, Wakefield published a paper in the scientific journal The Lancet, describing a connection between the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine and autism. Wakefield’s findings were soon subjected to scientific scrutiny: the number of subjects involved in the study was small and did not accurately represent the entire population; no controls were used. The sampled individuals were not randomly selected but rather carefully assembled to match the sample expected results. In 2010, The Lancet retracted the paper, and the General Medical Council revoked Wakefield’s medical license, citing ethical concerns. Even though Wakefield’s allegations marked the beginning of an era of discredit, and even fear, for the measles vaccination, Wakefield distances himself from the recent measles outbreaks. He claims that his team never stated that vaccination causes autism, despite repeatedly stated that the ‘MMR vaccine contributes to the current autism epidemic.’

3. Recklessly fabricating data

In 2010, two post-doctoral researchers at Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York were fired for scientific misconduct. They belonged to the team of the prestigious gene therapy researcher Savio Woon. Between 2005 and 2009, Woo’s team published four papers in different prestigious biomedical research journals, claiming to have discovered a possible cure for phenylketonuria, a metabolic disease that can lead to seizures and other medical complications, in mice. In 2014, an investigation conducted by the Office of Research Integrity reports that one of the fired postdocs, Li Chen, ‘intentionally and recklessly fabricated and falsified data.’ Chen, who refused to take responsibility for data falsification, was denied grant eligibility for three years.

4. Selfish meat eaters

One of the most extreme cases of scientific fraud is perhaps the Dutch former psychology professor Diederik Stapel, who admitted to having falsified data in at least 55 publications. One of the publications that got a lot of attention in Dutch media was a press bulletin where Stapel and his colleagues argued that meat-eaters are more selfish than vegetarians. After being subject to high criticism, Stapel admitted having failed as a scientist and deeply regretted his reckless research. At the same time, at the same he tried to justify his actions by pointing to the pressure he felt to publish in the best journals.

You just read Part I of the Science Frauds series. Appetite for more?

In the next post, we address Obokata’s fraud story. Last year, this Japanese researcher hit the spotlight when she was accused of data falsification, with consequences that largely surpassed the impact on her career.
The final part draws some conclusions: is it the publishing pressure or lust for fame?

References

Hwang, W. (2005). Patient-Specific Embryonic Stem Cells Derived from Human SCNT Blastocysts Science, 308 (5729), 1777-1783 DOI: 10.1126/science.1112286
Wakefield, A., Murch, S., Anthony, A., Linnell, J., Casson, D., Malik, M., Berelowitz, M., Dhillon, A., Thomson, M., Harvey, P., Valentine, A., Davies, S., & Walker-Smith, J. (1998). RETRACTED: Ileal-lymphoid-nodular hyperplasia, non-specific colitis, and pervasive developmental disorder in children The Lancet, 351 (9103), 637-641 DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(97)11096-0
Chen, L., Thung, S. N., & Woo, S. L. (2010). Retraction to “Metabolic basis of sexual dimorphism in PKU mice after genome-targeted PAH gene therapy.” Molecular therapy: the journal of the American Society of Gene Therapy, 18 (12) PMID: 20859262
Chen, L., & Woo, S. L. (2010). Retraction to “Correction in female PKU mice by repeated administration of mPAH cDNA using phiBT1 integration system”. Molecular therapy : the journal of the American Society of Gene Therapy, 18 (12) PMID: 20859260
Who is Andrew Wakefield?
The lancet
Transgress_v2_singlefile
Great science frauds
Former mount sinai postdoc faked gene therapy data
Research integrity cell-induced stress
Stem cell pioneer blamed media bashing in suicide note.

Illustration: Science Magazine.