suchandra Posted October 11, 2008 Report Share Posted October 11, 2008 Lately there're often strange hints at broadcasts that modern science is able to produce life but never providing any evidence. Although Vaishnava Institutions usually keep quiet and never comment on anything there're some non-Vaishnavas who consider it worth to expose cheating. Stem-cell researcher guilty of falsifying data 14:27 07 October 2008 http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn14886 NewScientist.com news service A former member of one of the highest-profile teams in stem-cell biology has been found guilty of falsifying results, after New Scientist questioned the findings. Last year, the work of researchers led by Catherine Verfaillie of the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis became mired in controversy, after New Scientist pointed to irregularities in their published results. Now an expert panel called in by the university to investigate has ruled that a PhD student on the team, Morayma Reyes, falsified data. Verfaillie's group shot to prominence in 2002, after publishing a paper in Nature (vol 418, p 41) suggesting that a rare type of adult stem cell from bone marrow – first isolated by Reyes – could give rise to all of the body's tissues. Such astonishing versatility had previously been seen only in embryonic stem cells (ESCs). The findings attracted huge scientific attention, and were seized upon as an ethical alternative to ESCs by self-styled "pro-life" activists – who oppose the destruction of human embryos to isolate stem cell lines. But over the years that followed, other researchers were unable to repeat the results. The verdict of falsification relates to an earlier paper on the cells, published in the journal Blood (vol 98, p 2615) in 2001. Less well known than the Nature paper, the Blood paper is significant because it describes cells isolated from the bone marrow of humans rather than experimental mice. Flipped images Last year, New Scientist revealed that figures in that paper documenting the presence of proteins in the stem cells as they developed into cells, including those normally found in cartilage and bone, also appeared in US patent 7015037, where they were supposed to describe different experiments. In the most disturbing case, the same image, flipped through 180° and slightly altered, was used twice in the Blood paper to represent the results of two different experiments. An expert panel of three scientists has now concluded that the problems ran deeper still. According to a summary of the panel's findings released by the university, parts of four figures in the Blood paper were falsified by manipulating the original images. For another image, the panel was unable to find the raw data. The university has now asked for the paper to be retracted. While deciding that figures in the patent were "seriously flawed", the panel said there was insufficient evidence of misconduct in their preparation. 'Inadequate supervision' The panel also found duplicated figures in both the Blood paper and another publication in the Journal of Clinical Investigation (vol 109, p 337) , but ruled that these errors were not misconduct. The Journal of Clinical Investigation has been informed of the problems, but the university has not asked for the second paper to be withdrawn. The problems with this paper were drawn to the panel's attention by Verfaillie herself, who is now at the Catholic University of Leuven in Belgium. The panel cleared Verfaillie of misconduct along with the other authors of both papers. Still, Verfaillie is criticised heavily by the panel for inadequate training and oversight of Reyes. "I have initiated a number of additional oversight measures designed to further enhance the integrity of research and scientific publications coming from my lab," says Verfaillie. "I am confident that these measures will avoid the recurrence of a similar problem in the future." Reyes' punishment is unknown, as the university is not allowed by Minnesota law to reveal disciplinary action against a former student. She is now at the University of Washington in Seattle, which may also review the matter. "We would have to gather all the relevant information and look at our policies," says spokesman Norm Arkans. Reyes disputes the finding that she misrepresented data. "These were honest errors in part due to inexperience, poor training and lack of clear standards about digital image handling and proper presentation," she told New Scientist. Earlier inquiry The finding against Reyes follows an earlier inquiry into the Nature paper and another publication in Experimental Hematology (vol 30, p 896) – again triggered by questions raised by New Scientist. In that case, six plots prepared by another junior member of the team were duplicated between the two papers. An earlier panel concluded that there was no evidence of deliberate misconduct, but pointed out that the experiments were flawed, because the controls were not carried out correctly. The problems surrounding the Minnesota team's work followed news of fraud in research on cloned human ESCs by South Korea's Woo Suk Hwang. Biologists contacted by New Scientist worry that the intense competition in stem-cell biology may tempt others into misrepresenting data. "My concern is that this sort of thing will happen again," says Arnold Kriegstein, who heads the Institute for Regeneration Medicine at the University of California, San Francisco. Today, most of the excitement surrounds the ability to "reprogram" adult cells back to an ESC-like state. Unlike the Minnesota team's work, this process has been repeated by several groups. But some biologists worry that problems may emerge as other scientists jump onto the bandwagon. "When a topic is of great interest – not just to scientists but also to the public – it's certainly more likely that someone will get ahead of themselves and not be as scrupulous as scientists have to be," says Jeanne Loring, a stem-cell biologist at the Scripps Research Institute in La Jolla, California. Stem Cells - Learn more about the promise and the controversy in our cutting edge special report . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AncientMariner Posted October 11, 2008 Report Share Posted October 11, 2008 I think a lot of scientists are bought off by the NWO or at very least they are caught up in institutions that are essentially contolled by the NWO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suchandra Posted October 12, 2008 Author Report Share Posted October 12, 2008 I think a lot of scientists are bought off by the NWO or at very least they are caught up in institutions that are essentially contolled by the NWO. This is right! Although there's for example New Radhadesh, "Chateau de Petite Somme", with Vaishnava University based in a 19th century Chateau in Belgium. There are presently around 80 people who live in the community, which was founded about 1980. New Radhadesh, "Chateau de Petite Somme" Next to this beautiful Chateau there's the Parlament of the European Union what has just recently passed a new resolution which reads as follows. The Evolution Theory of Charles Darwin is to be considered as scientific and can enter the schoolbooks of 70 mio students all over the EU. Did Chateau de Petite Somme pass any comment, like Prabhupada demanded, science=evidence? So far Chateau de Petite Somme only published the new pricelist for the guesthouse. http://www.radhadesh.com/index.php?id=14 "The Radhadesh guesthouse serves congregational members and guests. This makes the festivals, retreats, and daily spiritual programs held in Radhadesh easy to attend and comfortable to follow. Our guesthouse consists of sixteen guestrooms that can accommodate up to five people. Every room offers all the comfort you need during your visit and has its own bathroom. There is also a dormitory and a fully equipped conference hall, which can be hired by groups for private functions. The prices are very reasonable and the facilities are of a high standard. Since the guesthouse of Radhadesh is situated in the Belgian Ardennes and all rooms have a view on the beautiful landscape, this is a great place if you are looking for spiritual serenity or want to escape from the daily stress. Prices for weekdays: Single room (private bathroom) € 31,- / night / room Two persons (private bathroom) € 41,-€ / night / room Three persons (private bathroom) € 45,-€ / night / room Four persons (private bathroom) € 49,-€ / night / room Five persons (private bathroom) € 52,-€ / night / room Prices for weekends (Friday and Saturday night): Single room (private bathroom) € 37,- / night / room Two persons (private bathroom) € 48,-€ / night / room Three persons (private bathroom) € 52,-€ / night / room Four persons (private bathroom) € 56,-€ / night / room Five persons (private bathroom) € 58,-€ / night / room Dormitory: shared bathroom and toilets (please don't forget to bring your sleeping bag!) € 8,-€ / night / person All prices are excluding meals. Because the guesthouse is often very busy it is advised to reserve your rooms in advance. This can easily be done by the <align="center"> reservation form (Word)</align="center"> Conference room As well as guestrooms and dormitory facilities, the guesthouse also offers the possiblity to rent a large conference room with chairs, tables, video, and other equipement. Groups and societies can rent this room for € 100,-€ per day (please contact the guesthouse management to make a reservation). For more information please contact Vincent Serbruyns, the manager of the guesthouse. Tel / fax: +32 (0)86 38-71-31 E-mail: radhadesh.guesthouse@pamho.net Every guest who stays in the guesthouse automatically becomes a member for free. The above mentioned facilities are available to members." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.