Discussion Topic
Fraud, Errors and Misconceptions in Medical Research
Posted on 10/26/09, 10:42 pm
Fraud, Errors and Misconceptions in Medical Research
By Robert Roy Britt
posted: 26 October 2009 10:00 am ET
Buzz up!
Comments (5) | Recommend (1)
Updated 2:09 p.m. ET
Three years after being charged for fraud, misusing state funds and violating bioethics laws, disgraced South Korean stem cell researcher Hwang Woo-suk was convicted today on some but not all charges.
The court determined he had partially fabricated the research results, according to media reports, but since he has repented the court handed down a 2-year suspended sentence.
Hwang's team in 2004 claimed to have cloned human embryonic stem cells. But the scientist fabricated crucial data, and even researchers working on the project didn't know the results had been faked.
While Hwang's case has become one of the most notorious examples of breakthroughs gone bad, even well-done and above-board health and medical studies have a history of being faulty, in part because the scientific process allows for publication of data that may appear to reveal a breakthrough, even though subsequent research might show just the opposite.
A study in 2005, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, found that one-third of all medical studies turn out to be wrong.
Even common existing treatments can be found useless years after they're widely accepted by the medical profession and the public. In 2007, scientists showed that honey works better than cough medicines in soothing children's coughs.
Another study this year revealed that conflicts of interest often taint medical studies. The research, detailed in the June 15 issue of the journal Cancer, found that 29 percent of cancer research published in high-profile journals had disclosed a conflict of interest. Those conflicts, moreover, seem to affect how studies were conducted. Research that had industry funding, for example, focused on treatment 62 percent of the time, while studies not funded by industry focused on treatment only 36 percent of the time.
Even good studies can be mucked up by the media, which tend to latch on to the juiciest stuff and squeeze all they can out of it, not always reporting the follow-up study in which the hoopla dries up. The result: distortion, albeit often unintentional.
Many studies produce findings that are incremental or relatively insignificant, yet the publicity machines at institutions are eager to promote their researchers' work, and journalists don't always do their jobs fully to dig into the context that reveals a study's true significance, or lack thereof.
For example, a review in 2006 found that much of what you read regarding health research lacks important context. Specifically, the media often omit basic facts in stories they report from professional medical conferences, the study concluded. That's partly because research revealed at conferences often has not been published in peer-reviewed journals, where such context is required and where outlandish claims are often quashed.
Then again, Hwang's supposed breakthrough in 2005 was published in Science, one of the most respected journals around.
7 Solid Health Tips That No Longer Apply
7 Medical Myths Even Doctors Believe
The Most Popular Myths in Science
In The Water Cooler, Imaginova's Editorial Director Robert Roy Britt looks at what people are talking about in the world of science and beyond. Find more in the archives and on Twitter.
Comments (5)
You must be logged in to post a comment: Log In | Register
Sort by:NewestOldestRecommendedPost a Comment
posted 26 October 2009, 12:30 pm ET
tweed wrote:
I agree with this article 100%! There should be a regulatory body for all medcal publications and the media would need to contact this body for facts rather than researchers directly. Because of the media and such varying opinions I'm on the fence as to the H1N1 vaccine, will it work??? I've never gotten a flu shot and I haven't had a flu bug in over 10 yrs. I really don't see the need for it but I'm worried just the same, more for my daughter than myself but all the same....
Reply | Recommend (0) | Report Abuse
posted 26 October 2009, 1:00 pm ET
JoelDooris wrote:
I used to work in some research / Clinical trials settings and I can say with no doubt the results are cherry picked. It just goes to show that if a product/manufacturer is paying for the study they can have significant input as to where and how the research is directed.
Even the FDA has issues like this, they get funding from drug research companies to 'fast rack' their products.
Then you have direct marketing to consumers that is yet another way to get the product off the shelf and into the books, with or without good science to back up the claims.
This is BIG business with deep pockets and lots of players. All getting rich off of the sick. It's perverse when you think about it.
Reply | Recommend (1) | Report Abuse
posted 26 October 2009, 1:12 pm ET
demetrio3 wrote:
me too!!!! 51 yrs old never had flu or even serious cold,,,had all childhood ailments not getting flu shot gain this yr,,,,even if the sky is falling,,,,
Reply | Recommend (0) | Report Abuse
posted 26 October 2009, 5:08 pm ET
handedann wrote:
I'm completely dumbfounded by the mindset of these researchers who falsify their data. They're more than intelligent enough to know that they will be eventually be exposed and their careers ruined. To make such a claim is to beg everyother researcher in the field to replicate your experiment only to soon find out that you're a fraud. Is the allure of fame and fortune really so powerfull that ones integrity and credibility no longer factor into the equation? How can anyone take credit for, or be proud of an achievement that was never attained? (shakes head slowly)
Reply | Recommend (0) | Report Abuse
posted 26 October 2009, 10:09 pm ET
dudemalls201 wrote:
50%off ca,ed hardy t-shirt$15 jeans,coach handbag$33,air max90,dunk,polo t-shirt$13,,lacoste t-shirt $13 air jordan for sale,$35,nfl nba jersy for sale
free shipping
accept paypal credit card
lower price fast shippment with higher quality
our website: http://www.dudemalls.com/
BEST QUALITY GUARANTEE!!
SAFTY & HONESTY GUARANTEE!!
FAST & PROMPT DELIVERY GUARANTEE!!
Packing: All the products are packed with original boxes and tags also retro cards/ code
numder
http://www.dudemalls.com
Features: AAA QUALITY, COMPETITIVE PRICE AND SERVICE
1) The goods are shipping by air express, such as EMS,the shipping time is in 5-7 business days
2) They are in stock now;
3) Various styles and color for clients' choice
4) The Products are fit for most people, because of our wholesale price
puma gucci$35,nike jordans six ring,yeezy$%5!!
new era caps$13 gucci handbags jeans,t-shirts sunglass,caps
true religion jeans$35,ca,ed hardy jeans$35
LV,CHANAL,HANDBAGS$35
NIKE SHOX AIR MAX TL3 OZ NZ ONLY $35
UGG TIMBLAND LACOSTE SHOES ED HARDY SHOES$35
DIESEL T-SHIRT,GSTAR T-SHIRT,CA T-SHIRT,50% OFF FOR SALE $15
DIOR SUNGLASS,DG SUNGLASS$15
Reply | Recommend (0) | Report Abuse
Post a Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment: Log In | Register
User Comment Guidelines: It may take up to a minute for your comment to appear. Posting of comments requires membership in the Imaginova Community, which is subject to our Terms of Service. Imaginova reserves the right to remove, without notice, any comment for any reason whatsoever.
By Robert Roy Britt
posted: 26 October 2009 10:00 am ET
Buzz up!
Comments (5) | Recommend (1)
Updated 2:09 p.m. ET
Three years after being charged for fraud, misusing state funds and violating bioethics laws, disgraced South Korean stem cell researcher Hwang Woo-suk was convicted today on some but not all charges.
The court determined he had partially fabricated the research results, according to media reports, but since he has repented the court handed down a 2-year suspended sentence.
Hwang's team in 2004 claimed to have cloned human embryonic stem cells. But the scientist fabricated crucial data, and even researchers working on the project didn't know the results had been faked.
While Hwang's case has become one of the most notorious examples of breakthroughs gone bad, even well-done and above-board health and medical studies have a history of being faulty, in part because the scientific process allows for publication of data that may appear to reveal a breakthrough, even though subsequent research might show just the opposite.
A study in 2005, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, found that one-third of all medical studies turn out to be wrong.
Even common existing treatments can be found useless years after they're widely accepted by the medical profession and the public. In 2007, scientists showed that honey works better than cough medicines in soothing children's coughs.
Another study this year revealed that conflicts of interest often taint medical studies. The research, detailed in the June 15 issue of the journal Cancer, found that 29 percent of cancer research published in high-profile journals had disclosed a conflict of interest. Those conflicts, moreover, seem to affect how studies were conducted. Research that had industry funding, for example, focused on treatment 62 percent of the time, while studies not funded by industry focused on treatment only 36 percent of the time.
Even good studies can be mucked up by the media, which tend to latch on to the juiciest stuff and squeeze all they can out of it, not always reporting the follow-up study in which the hoopla dries up. The result: distortion, albeit often unintentional.
Many studies produce findings that are incremental or relatively insignificant, yet the publicity machines at institutions are eager to promote their researchers' work, and journalists don't always do their jobs fully to dig into the context that reveals a study's true significance, or lack thereof.
For example, a review in 2006 found that much of what you read regarding health research lacks important context. Specifically, the media often omit basic facts in stories they report from professional medical conferences, the study concluded. That's partly because research revealed at conferences often has not been published in peer-reviewed journals, where such context is required and where outlandish claims are often quashed.
Then again, Hwang's supposed breakthrough in 2005 was published in Science, one of the most respected journals around.
7 Solid Health Tips That No Longer Apply
7 Medical Myths Even Doctors Believe
The Most Popular Myths in Science
In The Water Cooler, Imaginova's Editorial Director Robert Roy Britt looks at what people are talking about in the world of science and beyond. Find more in the archives and on Twitter.
Comments (5)
You must be logged in to post a comment: Log In | Register
Sort by:NewestOldestRecommendedPost a Comment
posted 26 October 2009, 12:30 pm ET
tweed wrote:
I agree with this article 100%! There should be a regulatory body for all medcal publications and the media would need to contact this body for facts rather than researchers directly. Because of the media and such varying opinions I'm on the fence as to the H1N1 vaccine, will it work??? I've never gotten a flu shot and I haven't had a flu bug in over 10 yrs. I really don't see the need for it but I'm worried just the same, more for my daughter than myself but all the same....
Reply | Recommend (0) | Report Abuse
posted 26 October 2009, 1:00 pm ET
JoelDooris wrote:
I used to work in some research / Clinical trials settings and I can say with no doubt the results are cherry picked. It just goes to show that if a product/manufacturer is paying for the study they can have significant input as to where and how the research is directed.
Even the FDA has issues like this, they get funding from drug research companies to 'fast rack' their products.
Then you have direct marketing to consumers that is yet another way to get the product off the shelf and into the books, with or without good science to back up the claims.
This is BIG business with deep pockets and lots of players. All getting rich off of the sick. It's perverse when you think about it.
Reply | Recommend (1) | Report Abuse
posted 26 October 2009, 1:12 pm ET
demetrio3 wrote:
me too!!!! 51 yrs old never had flu or even serious cold,,,had all childhood ailments not getting flu shot gain this yr,,,,even if the sky is falling,,,,
Reply | Recommend (0) | Report Abuse
posted 26 October 2009, 5:08 pm ET
handedann wrote:
I'm completely dumbfounded by the mindset of these researchers who falsify their data. They're more than intelligent enough to know that they will be eventually be exposed and their careers ruined. To make such a claim is to beg everyother researcher in the field to replicate your experiment only to soon find out that you're a fraud. Is the allure of fame and fortune really so powerfull that ones integrity and credibility no longer factor into the equation? How can anyone take credit for, or be proud of an achievement that was never attained? (shakes head slowly)
Reply | Recommend (0) | Report Abuse
posted 26 October 2009, 10:09 pm ET
dudemalls201 wrote:
50%off ca,ed hardy t-shirt$15 jeans,coach handbag$33,air max90,dunk,polo t-shirt$13,,lacoste t-shirt $13 air jordan for sale,$35,nfl nba jersy for sale
free shipping
accept paypal credit card
lower price fast shippment with higher quality
our website: http://www.dudemalls.com/
BEST QUALITY GUARANTEE!!
SAFTY & HONESTY GUARANTEE!!
FAST & PROMPT DELIVERY GUARANTEE!!
Packing: All the products are packed with original boxes and tags also retro cards/ code
numder
http://www.dudemalls.com
Features: AAA QUALITY, COMPETITIVE PRICE AND SERVICE
1) The goods are shipping by air express, such as EMS,the shipping time is in 5-7 business days
2) They are in stock now;
3) Various styles and color for clients' choice
4) The Products are fit for most people, because of our wholesale price
puma gucci$35,nike jordans six ring,yeezy$%5!!
new era caps$13 gucci handbags jeans,t-shirts sunglass,caps
true religion jeans$35,ca,ed hardy jeans$35
LV,CHANAL,HANDBAGS$35
NIKE SHOX AIR MAX TL3 OZ NZ ONLY $35
UGG TIMBLAND LACOSTE SHOES ED HARDY SHOES$35
DIESEL T-SHIRT,GSTAR T-SHIRT,CA T-SHIRT,50% OFF FOR SALE $15
DIOR SUNGLASS,DG SUNGLASS$15
Reply | Recommend (0) | Report Abuse
Post a Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment: Log In | Register
User Comment Guidelines: It may take up to a minute for your comment to appear. Posting of comments requires membership in the Imaginova Community, which is subject to our Terms of Service. Imaginova reserves the right to remove, without notice, any comment for any reason whatsoever.
Welcome
