Printer Friendly

AIDS researcher cleared of charges.

The charges of scientific misconduct leveled at federal AIDS researcher Robert C. Gallo a year ago by the National Institutes of Health's Office of Research Integrity (ORI) were dropped Nov. 12.

Last December, ORI released a report claiming that Gallo misrepresented his laboratory's ability to grow the virus that causes AIDS (SN: 1/9/93, p. 20). The agency said that researchers working in Gallo's lab grew a virus supplied by French scientists but failed to give credit to the French team in one of four 1984 papers that characterize the AIDS virus.

Lyle W. Bivens, director of ORI, says the office will no longer pursue the Gallo case because a Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) appeals panel has started applying a more stringent standard of proof to scientific misconduct cases. On Nov. 3, the HHS panel cleared Mikulas Popovic, a scientist who had worked in Gallo's laboratory and had also been charged with misconduct. In that case, the panel said, ORI failed to prove that Popovic intentionally made false statements in the AIDS papers.

The HHS panel was expected to hold ORI to the same strict standard in the Gallo case, forcing the agency to show that Gallo had shown a "deliberate intent" to deceive in his 1984 paper. In addition, ORI would have to demonstrate that there was "no possibility" of honest error in the misstatements or omissions in that disputed paper.

Bivens contends that it is very difficult to prove intent to deceive. He believes that a better standard for scientific misconduct is one in which investigators prove that the scientist "knew or should have known" a statement to be false. (Indeed, ORI used that standard to pursue its case against Gallo and Popovic.) The "knew or should have known" standard allows investigators to bring charges against scientists who are suspected of "gross negligence," he says.

Many scientists and lawyers have criticized that standard for its failure to distinguish between honest mistakes and intentional acts. "It's outrageous," comments Gallo attorney Joseph Onek. "No scientific paper is absolutely perfect," says Onek, who is at the Washington, D.C., firm of Crowell & Moring. Further, he asserts, ORI has pursued misconduct charges that are based on honest errors or errors that creep into a paper being rushed to a journal for publication.

Bivens acknowledges that some scientific misconduct cases involve judgment calls. However, he points out, ORI takes on only 20 percent of cases that come to its attention. The remainder are dropped for lack of evidence, he says. "For the most part... we are blowing the whistle on significant [cases of] misconduct," Bivens adds.
COPYRIGHT 1993 Science Service, Inc.
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 1993, Gale Group. All rights reserved. Gale Group is a Thomson Corporation Company.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Title Annotation:National Institutes of Health's Office of Research Integrity drops scientific misconduct charges against federal AIDS researcher Robert C. Gallo
Publication:Science News
Article Type:Brief Article
Date:Dec 4, 1993
Words:437
Previous Article:Identifying and indoor air threat.
Next Article:Scientific misconduct: not so rare?
Topics:


Related Articles
Study details misconduct in drug research.
Misconduct cases probed.
White coats, black deeds; the new scientific method: lie, cheat, and get good PR.
NIH says paper contained bogus data.
NIH director faces congressional scrutiny.
AIDS codiscoverer censured for misconduct.
Breast cancer research on trial; Congress hears a tale of false data, delays, and doubts.
Accord ends feud over AIDS blood test.
Appeals panel reverses fraud finding.
Fishy findings sustain, then snuff, stellar career. (Flame Out).

Terms of use | Copyright © 2017 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters