Fake Research Allegations Reach New Highs

[Judi Lynn]

Fake Research Allegations Reach New Highs

Allegations of Research Misconduct - Including Fabrication and Falsification - Reach Record Highs

By MARTHA MENDOZA
Associated Press

Jul 10, 2005 — On the night of his 12th wedding anniversary, Dr. Andrew Friedman was terrified. This brilliant surgeon and researcher at Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School feared that he was about to lose everything his career, his family, the life he'd built because his boss was coming closer and closer to the truth: For the past three years, Friedman had been faking actually making up data in some of the respected, peer-reviewed studies he had published in top medical journals.
(snip)

On this night, March 13, 1995, he had been ordered in writing by his department chair to clear up what appeared to be suspicious data.
(snip)

"I created data. I made it up. I also made up patients that were fictitious," he testified.
(snip)

Allegations of research misconduct reached record highs last year the Department of Health and Human Services received 274 complaints, which was 50 percent higher than 2003 and the most since 1989 when the federal government established a program to deal with scientific misconduct.
(snip)

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=925270

[HysteryDiagnosis]

1. You won't find this sort of thing in the supplement industry... but you

will find them being hammered for making "false claims" almost monthly.

www.publishedresearch.com

[KittyWampus]

5. There's Also A Network Of "Debunkers" Set Up To Smear Honest Research

and honest scientists.

This includes charlatans like Randi the Magician.

[Raster]

6. so, what's your beef with Randi?

[KittyWampus]

22. He Participated In A Smear Campaign Against A Scientist Whose Work

had been replicated in other labs.

[Raster]

28. who? what was the focus point for the research?

[HysteryDiagnosis]

13. Yes.... let's not let it out of the bag that spontaneous remissions occur

without chemo and radiation... or that there are supplements out there that kick the crap out of various cancers at the DNA level. Let's not let that biggy get out...

[Catchawave]

14. Reminds me of a recent article.....

http://news.yahoo.com/s/cpress/20050610/ca_pr_on_he/health_malpractice_diagnosis

Fri Jun 10,12:32 PM ET



FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. (AP) - A jury awarded $8 million US to the husband of a woman who died after chemotherapy that wasn't necessary because she didn't have cancer, lawyers said.

more....

[HysteryDiagnosis]

15. Criminy..... how in the hell did they make that mistake???

[KittyWampus]

23. Your Attempt To Misdirect Discredits Any Point You Might Try To Make

noone mentioned anything about 'supplements that kick the crap out of various cancers at the DNA level'.

Except you.

[HysteryDiagnosis]

25. Yes, it's a rather large beef of mine since my father was chemo'd

and radiated to death. I have a problem with this research being surpressed. I'm somewhat biased on this subject.

[OzarkDem]

31. There are also many cases

where the chemo and the radiation cure the cancer. Happens all the time.

[HysteryDiagnosis]

35. I noticed in your post a reference to breast cancer... what if, I say,

what if there was a supplement that was as effective if not more effective than Tamoxifen that didn't put you at a 10 fold increased risk for uterine/cervical cancer after two years.... would you ignore it... or would you tell other women about it, that is if the research was out there proving it to be so. It's called I3C with Dim. Look it up.


1: Recent Results Cancer Res. 2005;166:257-75. Related Articles, Links


Innovative agents in cancer prevention.

Manson MM, Farmer PB, Gescher A, Steward WP.

Cancer Biomarkers and Prevention Group, Departments of Cancer Studies and Biochemistry, University of Leicester, LE1 7RH, UK. [e-mail]

There are many facets to cancer prevention: a good diet, weight control and physical activity, a healthy environment, avoidance of carcinogens such as those in tobacco smoke, and screening of populations at risk to allow early detection. But there is also the possibility of using drugs or naturally occurring compounds to prevent initiation of, or to suppress, tumour growth. Only a few such agents have been used to date in the clinic with any success, and these include non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for colon, finasteride for prostate and tamoxifen or raloxifene for breast tumours. An ideal chemopreventive agent would restore normal growth control to a preneoplastic or cancerous cell population by modifying aberrant signalling pathways or inducing apoptosis (or both) in cells beyond repair. Characteristics for such an agent include selectivity for damaged or transformed cells, good bioavailability and more than one mechanism of action to foil redundancy or crosstalk in signalling pathways. As more research effort is being targeted towards this area, the distinction between chemotherapeutic and chemopreventive agents is blurring. Chemotherapeutic drugs are now being designed to target over- or under-active signalling molecules within cancer cells, a philosophy which is just as relevant in chemoprevention. Development of dietary agents is particularly attractive because of our long-standing exposure to them, their relative lack of toxicity, and encouraging indications from epidemiology. The carcinogenic process relies on the cell's ability to proliferate abnormally, evade apoptosis, induce angiogenesis and metastasise to distant sites. In vitro studies with a number of different diet-derived compounds suggest that there are molecules capable of modulating each of these aspects of tumour growth. However, on the negative side many of them have rather poor bioavailability. The challenge is to uncover their multiple mechanisms of action in order to predict their efficacy, to learn how to use them effectively in combination, and in some cases to redesign them to improve potency or bioavailability. These ideas are illustrated by dietary agents such as indole-3-carbinol (I3C), epigallocatechin gallate (EGCG), curcumin and resveratrol, all of which appear to have a number of different molecular targets, impinging on several signalling pathways. Ultimately it may be possible not only to suppress tumours and to extend quality of life by administering appropriate diet-derived molecules, but also to refine the definition of a cancer chemopreventive diet.

Publication Types:
Review
Review, Tutorial

PMID: 15648195

[donco6]

39. I'm one.

As soon as chemo started, the tumor shrank. 6 years and no more cancer. I think I'll put my faith in real science.

[TankLV]

40. Hey - I'm one of the lucky ones - I seem able to take any of my meds

with no complications - but it's not for everyone, unfortunately.

The point he was trying to make is that there are plenty of therapys out there that are igonored because they won't make any bucks for the pharms. That doesn't lessen the importance and efficacy of meds.

[BiggJawn]

17. So why don't you go claim Randi's Megabuck prize?

http://www.randi.org/research/

Should be easy, if he's such a "charlatan"...

Or is it rigged, because EVERYBODY knows the magic teddy bears can't do their work if there's non-believers in the room?

Yeah, Skeptics are such kill-joys, aren't we?

[KittyWampus]

21. Because Randi Is A Charlatan & Will ALWAYS Interject Himself Into A

supposedly 'scientific' experiment.... and in the process corrupt it to his own advantage.

Tell me, what kind of objectivity does Randi have with a million dollars on the line?
What scientific credentials?

Answer, NONE.

[William Seger]

36. Sorry, but...

You really have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. Randi never "interjects(s) himself into a supposedly 'scientific' experiment." In most cases, he isn't even involved in the testing, unless requested by the prize applicant.

The rules of the million-dollar challenge are very simple: You state what "paranormal" thing you're going to do, under what conditions, and you negotiate with JREF the specific, objectively measurable results that you both agree will constitute a successful demonstration of that ability. The results have to be stated in such a way that no subjectivity is involved in determining whether or not you succeeded. (And if you can't do that, then what's the use for this "paranormal" ability?) Randi may or may not be involved with that negotiation, but after that, it's just a matter of doing the testing under controlled conditions with reliable observers, and then it's obvious to everyone whether or not you did what you claimed to be able to do.

It's ironic that in one post you take up the defense of "honest researchers" against Randi, but then you repeat some common lies about the million-dollar challenge.

[alarimer]

41. He is not

All he wants is PROOF. Scientific proof. The supplements industry is hammered because they refuse (or can't) supply proof to their extravagant claims. There is no proof in many cases because there have been no scientifically acceptable tests that include appropriate controls and statistically significant results.

Randi's prize mainly applies to the paranormal I think.

In any case, an article such as this does not discredit the entire medical profession, no matter how much you want to tar them with the same brush.

[BiggJawn]

46. We could ask the same questions about the Snake-Oil salesmen...

And as pointed out in another post, Randi does sort of focus on the "paranormal", as opposed to the Snake-Oil Salesmen.

"Tell me, what kind of objectivity does Randi have with a million dollars on the line?
What scientific credentials?"

Indeed, why not ask the same about those in the Supplements Industry.

I'm a diabetic. If I could find a non-PHARMA treatment that was safe and effective, you betchur sweet bippy I'd be on it.
But it's all bullshit. Chromium Picolinate, "Glucose Tolerance Factor", Cinnamon Extract, yada, yada, yada, all bullshit.
Sure, I may have noticed a change of maybe 2-3 mg/dL in my blood sugar, but I hardly consider that enough of a difference to be an "Amazing Discovery!". Especially at the prices they demand for that stuff.

And if I was a medical doctor or a research PhD with the scruples of a ReTHUGlican fundraiser, and some guy wanted to pay me $100,000 a year for the use of my name to hawk some "supplement"?

Yeah, wtf. When it all comes crashing down, if anyone wants to stick ME with anything I can always whine about the "big CONSPIRACY" against the poor widdle supplement industry by the big bad PHARMA and their jock-passenger, the FDA....

[William Seger]

34. Randi is no charlatan

Sounds like someone has been spoon-feeding you a lot of crap. Not all of the people that the "network of 'debunkers'" go after are frauds; many of them are "honestly" self-deluded. When it comes to medicine, both are dangerous.

If "alternative medicines" are really worth anything, then it ought to be possible to prove their effectivness in controlled studies. Some of Randi's enemies are indeed frauds, but many are people who simply don't understand the basic principles of critical thinking.

[VegasWolf]

38. Here, here!! nt

[OzarkDem]

9. No one knows

Supplements industry refuses to use the peer review process.

[BuddhaGirl]

12. "Supplements industry refuses to use the peer review process"

not a true statement - do some research. Supplement manufacturers such as Enzymatic Therapy and Jarrow conduct clinical studies and publish in peer reviewed journals. There are many others as well.

[HysteryDiagnosis]

16. You go girl..... people buy whatever the corporate sources tell them

when in fact, much research has been done, alot of it overseas.

The simple truth is that many many diseases/conditions are spurred on by oxidative stress. Certain antioxidants can and do inhibit the expression of certain genes, usually bad genes.... so I don't see why it has to remain such a deep dark secret.

I am sure the German Commission E mongographs have plenty of research behind them, they are listed on Jama's site, so there must be a little something to it all.

[union_maid]

45. Supplement companies are corporations, too

At least they usually are. And they release studies where they can offer proof, but market with less specific claims where they can't. And sometimes they push that envelope. I worked for someone who was sued at least once - I think several times - for that. And it was reasonable. They skirted around the regulations in their labelling all the time - and they did it on purpose. They might well have believed the things they were implying, but out of about a thousand products, they only had a real study of their own on one at the time I worked there. And when one of the founding family had serious heart problems, you can bet he went to mainstream doctors and conventional medicine to deal in addition to supplements to deal with it.

I'm not saying that supplements can't work. One of the approved therapies for some stages of a condition I have involves Vitamin A therapy. There are also a lot of other therapies that are used for it. I am saying that the supplement industry isn't much different from the prescription industry in terms of being a business and wanting you to buy their stuff. Period. And in both industries you'll find many honest researchers looking for products that will save and prolong life.

However, I went with radiation for my condition. No screwing around. I wanted to be aggressive with what I've got. 95% complete response rate was very compelling to me.

[OzarkDem]

19. Do you have a link?

Supplements & complementary medicine are being studied by researchers under federally funded, peer reviewed processes today. But manufacturers are still not conducting peer reviewed clinical trials of their products.

[HysteryDiagnosis]

20. How does one conduct studies on oh, I don't know.. "broccoli" that

cost millions of dollars to do.. (and I have no idea why) just to prove that they inhibit cancer in a very large way?

How about an extract of cabbage? There are dozens and dozens of abstracts on I3C on medline.

1: J Nutr Biochem. 2005 Feb;16(2):65-73. Related Articles, Links


Targets for indole-3-carbinol in cancer prevention.

Kim YS, Milner JA.

Nutritional Science Research Group, Division of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA. [e-mail]

Mounting preclinical and clinical evidence indicate that indole-3-carbinol (I3C), a key bioactive food component in cruciferous vegetables, has multiple anticarcinogenic and antitumorigenic properties. Evidence that p21, p27, cyclin-dependent kinases, retinoblastoma, Bax/Bcl-2, cytochrome P-450 1A1 and GADD153 are targets for I3C already exists. Modification of nuclear transcription factors including Sp1, estrogen receptor, nuclear factor kappaB and aryl hydrocarbon receptor may represent a common site of action to help explain downstream cellular responses to dietary I3C and, ultimately, to its anticancer properties. While the current information is intriguing, future I3C research needs to focus on why these changes in nuclear transcription factors occur and how they relate to phenotypic responses and the quantity and duration of exposure to I3C and its dimer 3,3'-diindolylmethane.

Publication Types:
Review
Review, Tutorial

PMID: 15681163

[OzarkDem]

30. Clinical trials for supplements

are rather scarce, though, aren't they? As opposed to pharma companies, companies that develop supplements don't usually conduct any kind of peer reviewed research on their products.

Thanks to consumer advocates, more basic research is being done on diet, environment, etc. But that information has to be tested in real human beings, a big step.

[HysteryDiagnosis]

33. Here it is in a nutshell..... I have listened to people who have been

sent home to hospice care, who have purchased little more than a juicer and organic veggies who are still around to talk about it.

Then there is this, and then there was my father... I therefore absolutely hate it when this research is suppressed or poo pooed for not having any "studies" to prove that in effect, nature has supplied the answers and we have denied them for a buck.

CANCER THERAPY AND GLYCONUTRIENTS
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1999 10:06:55 -0700

Oral Presentation: Comprehensive Cancer Care II: Integrating Complementary & Alternative Therapies,
Sponsored by Center for Mind-Body Medicine & National Cancer Institute,
Hyatt Regency Crystal City, Arlington, VA, June 1999


A PILOT SURVEY:
STANDARD CANCER THERAPY COMBINED WITH NUTRACEUTICAL DIETARY SUPPLEMENTATION IMPROVES TREATMENT RESPONDS AND PATIENT QUALITY OF LIFE:

G. Hyland, M.D., D. Miller, M.T., Med-Center One, Dept. Radiation Oncology, Bismark, North Dakota



In thousands of cancer cases evaluate by H. Foster, 87% percent of those with "spontaneous remissions" had made major dietary changes prior to tumor regression.

The Dietary Supplement Health Education Act of 1994 resulted in millions of US citizens adding a plethora of supplements to their diets.

A favorable response by 5 patients that failed all cancer therapy was noted after it was stopped.

We found that they had consumed glyconutrient, phytonutrient and phytogenin containing dietary supplements.

A search revealed that Busbee et. al 1994 found a glyconutrient in these diet supplements increased IL-1, IL-6, INF and TNF production in monocyte cultures.

See et. all 1999 reported enhanced NK lymphocyte cytolytic function in response to multiple Glyconutrients. Barhomi et. al 1997 found glyconutrients increased intracellular reduced-glutathione protection 50% in liver cells.

Such activity provides a potential differential effect for tumor cell destruction and normal cell protection. To increase our observations, patients malignancies were solicited from a 3 State area and 127 volunteered to add nutraceuticals to their diet.

100 patients returned a quality of life survey focusing on weight loss, fatigue, nausea, vomiting, pain control, ability to complete treatments on schedule, physical activity and sense of well being.

40% of the group had failed standard therapy and were in a state of progressive disease. 60% were starting radiation or chemotherapy.

85% reported improvements in the above clinical parameters.

The phytogenin supplement contains plant sterols for nutrient based endocrine support. Ovarian, breast, uterine, and prostate malignancy patients were discouraged from taking this nutrient.

Some elected to add the phytogenin to their diet and they reported the best preservation of appetite, muscle mass, and had the least side effects during treatment.

Patients with a diagnoses of ovarian carcinoma, astrocytoma grade IV, lymphoma with mild marrow suppression, a massive pelvic myxosarcoma, and colon adenocarcinoma with brain metastasis had unprecedented responses.

Conclusions:
Nutraceutical dietary supplements…

Do not inhibit tumor cell destruction by radiation and chemotherapy

Enhance tumor cell destruction

Protect normal cells from radiation and cytotoxic damage

Induce reductions in tumor mass in malignancies resistant to all treatments

Improve quality of life for patients by reducing toxicity and side effects from radiation and chemotherapy.

A formal, controlled clinical study is warranted to further evaluate the effects of Nutraceutical dietary supplementation in combination with standard cancer therapy.

[OzarkDem]

43. Need more than one study

When there is enough evidence, products can move forward for FDA approval. I don't see what the problem is here. Nutrition and supplements are being studied. What is your complaint?

Have you also noticed studies lately regarding supplements that show no benefit and sometimes harm?

Research is moving forward. But blaming the scientific community when research you support doesn't give the results you want doesn't get you anywhere. Just as bad is the attitude that treatments like chemotherapy don't work. They do for many people.

[HysteryDiagnosis]

44. I take your point well..... and I understand that supplements are not

a good alternative to a PROVEN THERAPY. But, when a profession that likes to tout it's high level of research and proclaim that they are practicing evidence based medicine, ignore a person's

ascorbic acid status

antioxidant status

reduced glutathione status

coenzyme q10 status

the very items that normally keep a cancer from taking root in a person parhaps every day of their lives... I get perturbed.

Yes, more than one study is needed... and they will be done. The best results are going to be derived from trials that apply glyconutrients against cancer (in addition to traditional interventions) as was exampled in this study. These papers are speaking of simply one aloe polymannose. The complete glyconutrient complex is capable of so much more.


1: Mol Biother. 1991 Jun;3(2):79-87. Related Articles, Links


Decreased mortality of Norman murine sarcoma in mice treated with the immunomodulator, Acemannan.

Peng SY, Norman J, Curtin G, Corrier D, McDaniel HR, Busbee D.

Department of Anatomy, College of Veterinary Medicine, Texas A & M University, College Station 77843.

An extract from the parenchyma of Aloe barbadensis Miller shown to contain long chain polydispersed beta (1,4)-linked mannan polymers with random O-acetyl groups (acemannan, Carrisyn) was found to initiate the phagocyte production of monokines that supported antibody dependent cellular cytotoxicity and stimulated blastogenesis in thymocytes. Acemannan, in both enriched and highly purified forms, was administered intraperitoneally to female CFW mice into which murine sarcoma cells had been subcutaneously implanted. The rapidly growing, highly malignant and invasive sarcoma grew in 100% of implanted control animals, resulting in mortality in 20 to 46 days, dependent on the number of cells implanted. Approximately 40% of animals treated with acemannan at the time of tumor cell implantation (1.5 x 10(6) cells) survived. Tumors in acemannan-treated animals exhibited vascular congestion, edema, polymorphonuclear leukocyte infiltration, and central necrosing foci with hemorrhage and peripheral fibrosis. The data indicate that in vivo treatment of peritoneal macrophages stimulates the macrophage production of monokines, including interleukin-1 and tumor necrosis factor. The data further indicate that sarcomas in animals treated i.p. with acemannan at the time of tumor cell implantation were infiltrated by immune system cells, became necrotic, and regressed. The combined data suggest that acemannan-stimulated synthesis of monokines resulted in the initiation of immune attack, necrosis, and regression of implanted sarcomas in mice.

PMID: 1910624



1: Immunopharmacology. 1996 Nov;35(2):119-28. Related Articles, Links


Activation of a mouse macrophage cell line by acemannan: the major carbohydrate fraction from Aloe vera gel.

Zhang L, Tizard IR.

Department of Veterinary Pathobiology, Texas A & M University College Station 77843, USA.

Acemannan is the name given to the major carbohydrate fraction obtained from the gel of the Aloe vera leaf. It has been claimed to have several important therapeutic properties including acceleration of wound healing, immune stimulation, anti-cancer and anti-viral effects. However, the biological mechanisms of these activities are unclear. Because of this wide diversity of effects, it is believed that they may be exerted through pluripotent effector cells such as macrophages. The effects of acemannan on the mouse macrophage cell line, RAW 264.7 cells were therefore investigated. It was found that acemannan could stimulate macrophage cytokine production, nitric oxide release, surface molecule expression, and cell morphologic changes. The production of the cytokines IL-6 and TNF-alpha were dependent on the dose of acemannan provided. Nitric oxide production, cell morphologic changes and surface antigen expression were increased in response to stimulation by a mixture of acemannan and IFN-gamma. These results suggest that acemannan may function, at least in part, through macrophage activation.

PMID: 8956975

[mopinko]

26. right, like how safe and effective ephedra is

wake up. the "wholistic health" industry is no different from any other multibillion dollar industry. look at the lobbying effort to avoid regulation, and look at the ephedra cover-ups. they ain't a bunch of barefoot flower children. they have killed plenty of people, directly, through unsafe products, and indirectly, through disinformation that prevented people from getting proven treatments for dangerous diseases. ask me about my dead niece.

[BuddhaGirl]

48. the ephedra ban was recently overtuned

because the FDA did not prove that it was unsafe.

http://www.citizens.org/hill/ephedraban.cfm

Ephedra has been used in Chinese medicine for thousands of years - it is safe when taken properly. Ephedra works like magic for me when my allergies kick up!

[fasttense]

2. The researches are now following the sterling example set by the WH.

When corruption at the highest levels is ignored and rewarded, when government agencies are encouraged to manipulate data and rewrite scientific facts, is it any wonder that the scientists themselves are following suit?

[nolabels]

3. and just about anybody else

Making up imaginative laws to legalize torture, theft, slavery or just plain wars for personal preferences

[rucky]

8. welcome to the new Dark Ages n/t

[KittyWampus]

4. I Stand Partly Vindicated. The Science Industrial Complex Has Perverted

the true spirit of what Science is and how it is practiced.

Establishment Science is now rather like the Petroleum Industry.

It is in the position of stifling dissent and any research or evidence that contradicts the currently accepted paradigm, hierarchy and corporate structure.

This is especially true in Medicial Science.

Researchers are under pressure to perform and those who stray from the "accepted" doctrine WILL be punished and ostracized. Means of punishment include character assasination of the like to what happened to Clinton.

Liberals need to wake up to what's going on and stop their kneejerk reactions to those of us who question Science as it is currently practised.

[alarimer]

42. bullshit

The vast majority of scientists are not as you describe. You will never get anywhere without the scientific method. Extraordinary claims (as in the supplements industry) require proof. The scientific method is the ONLY way to do that. Anything else is snake oil and scientific ignorance. Scientific illiteracy is what will kill this country.

[bemildred]

7. Fake science to support the fake economy. nt

[OzarkDem]

10. Don't blame everyone

There is still a great deal of high quality, productive research going on and a lot of hard working, committed researchers.

Scientists and clinicians have to get used to the idea of allowing educated consumer reviewers to become part of the peer review process. The more the process is open to the public, the less likely these events will occur.

Too much money, too much commercial influence and too little oversight causes this problem. Its easily remedied.

[Catchawave]

11. Ahhh, remember the "smoking beagles" .......

http://www.lcolby.com/b-chap9.htm

[BiggJawn]

18. There's BIG BUCKS to be made in "cooking" Science!

Competition for Grant $$$ and Peer exposure is so high in the research world.

Announce that you have 20 million bucks available for research into flying pigs, and somebody will come up with pictures of vestigal wing bones in pork shoulders...

We actually had a grad student murder a colleague on campus a few years ago because of this pressure to succeed...

[LeighAnn]

24. ...was found to have made up two families ... in grant applications

>>>In March, Dr. Gary Kammer, a Wake Forest University rheumatology professor and leading lupus expert, was found to have made up two families and their medical conditions in grant applications to the National Institutes of Health. He has resigned from the university and has been suspended from receiving federal grants for three years.<<<

What would happen to a mother who "made up" two family members to receive more food stamps? I'll bet she would be punished a lot more severly than this guy. People go to jail for fraud where I come from.

[preciousdove]

27. Lyme Disease was the pilot project for bogus research

Right now a paid journalist is going to do a smear piece on one of the only labs that has reasonably accurate Lyme test Igenx. Some years before they were set up by the FDA given blood samples that were deliberately handled improperly at high temperatures and when they protested they were told they had to do the tests and send the results because they had been paid for by government money. Those test results were then presented at a medical conference in Europe as the fault of the company. The FDA tried to close them down at that time but Lyme Disease advocates educated our Congressman and the FDA backed down. Now they have paid for another smear piece.

The FEDS paid for a bogus study about Lyme information on the internet. Sounds reasonable except that they were not looking for actual quacks they were looking for any site that did not adhere to the don't ask don't tell nature of hiding Lyme disease as other conditions that was the direct result of Congressional hearings in 1993 when Lyme became politicized. They managed to say all sites except the insurance/pharmaceutical front organization ADLF were quacks. (Hi agent Mike!).

After seeing what happened to Andy S you can now understand what the Lyme Community has been dealing with since then. The harassment and intimidation on outrageous levels and even some scary, health threatening dirty tricks. Those companies hired other ex-CIA led companies to "handle" us and then looked the other way.

http://64.233.179.104/search?q=cache:e_bxBIYauuIJ:lymeinfo.net/volaug20.html+Igenex+%22Nick+Harris%22&hl=en%20target=nw

"There are powerful, persuasive and well-supported opposing viewpoints on Lyme. We have medical evidence showing many cases of Lyme go undiagnosed and that, those which are diagnosed, need to be treated as long as there are clinical symptoms" said Dr. Nick Harris, President and CEO of IGeneX, whose approval to exhibit at the conference was abruptly withdrawn with no reason given. "Unless these facts are understood, many patients will go on needlessly suffering from this debilitating disease."

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/12/10/MN195999.DTL

[DS1]

29. I'd throw his ass in the gulag if I had my way

:shrug:

[Igel]

32. It's simple to falsify data.

It's done in all fields. It always has been. But my impression is it's gotten worse; in the rush to publish, in the rush to be right, in the rush to beef up your CV for grant applications, or get good grades, people are lying more. It's hard to teach morals and ethics in a classroom. Research into undergrad self-reported cheating shows that either more undergrads were cheating 5 years ago than 20 years ago, or that they're less constrained to lie about it; either way, it's bad news for a self-policing industry, i.e., academics. And there's no way to have outsiders police it.

You don't want to diss your colleague; it's not collegial, and if you know enough to do so, that person's likely to be on a grant review committee for your proposal, or evaluate your tenure application, or your papers submitted for application. The more specific the research, and the more the conclusions match what we want to believe, the less likely anybody's going to double check what you do.

A similar allegation made against Churchill wasn't met with the seriousness it should have been. This, at least, is, although it's the exact same problem. It's frequently seen as a political problem; it's not, it's ethical and moral. And it's damned irritating to be researching something, reach a dead end, and *later* find out that some of the data or conclusions you used were false.

Not only is data falsifying fairly common, but skewed interpretations and misrepresentations are common. I've looked at linguistics manuscripts using data from fairly obscure languages, grammars of which I've just happened to have, to find that the data was cherry-picked to support the analysis. Adjacent data was ignored, or it was obvious the author didn't read the language that the accompanying text was in. Or you get an analysis that claims to show something about stress, then you sit back and realize that every single example was ambiguous between two analyses--and when you independently dig up some examples that disambiguate between the two, the published one is wrong. People so want to take what they read to support what they want to believe that they sometimes, I think, honestly don't know they're being dishonest.

Or, even worse, you check the sources, and find that the sources cited do *not* say what they're purported to say--either important context is left out, or the citation is wrong. One professor I know at UCLA sat on a dissertation he was reading for six months; when he was done with it, he had personally checked every single citation and reference, and found many dozens of errors--some misquotes, some misrepresentations, and a bunch of citations that didn't correspond to the sources, or any source. It took the woman months to fix the dissertation. Some errors were typos. Some were of interpretation, and important. She was indignant that her credibility was questioned. Her advisor was indignant that she was more concerned with being caught making errors than making them in the first place.

She's teaching at a university overseas now. We've exported our bad ethics.

[Straight Shooter]

37. I'm sure the White House would be happy to employ Dr. Friedman. eom

[kodi]

47. i saw fellow grad students do it in the '70s-80's often

it goes on all the time. by the time someone comes along re-doing the experiemts, the researcher is usually long gone from the scene.

i had a terrible time as a grad chemist trying to reproduce soviet era chemistry papers, until i finally demanded (and damned vociferiously too)that my advisor come into the lab and watch me try to reproduce work from eastern europe on hetero-aromatic benzidine rearrarrangements. after a week working shoulder to shoulder with me my advisor finally admitted that the published work was bullshit. but it cost me months in the lab redoing their work over and over until i could get my advisor ro listen. all he thought was that i was not capable of doing the work correctly.

i hate that shit. its personal with me, i lost a lot of time in grad school trying to redo a pack of lies. if i caught anyone under me doing that i would kick them out immediately.

it is a fundamental betrayal of what science is supposed to be about.