May 14, 2018 05:36 AM
Nationalist Medicine? What Crap is This?
http://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/arc...ap-is-this
EXCERPT: . . . Which is why it’s disquieting to see this sort of thing. That article reports that the (quite nationalist) government in Hungary is causing trouble for universities there, specifically the Central European University, accusing it and some of its faculty members of being in the pay of opponents of the government. It’s especially sad to see the national science funding agency participate in such actions. Hungarian scientists were a profound influence on the 20th century; the country produced a run of mathematicians, physicists, biologists, and chemists that had colleagues at Los Alamos joking that they must be Martians in disguise. But they didn’t get to that point by trying to do only Pure Hungarian Research, because there’s no such thing.
No more than there is Pure American, Pure German, or Pure Chinese Research.A look at what Germany did to its own scientific establishment under the National Socialist government should be all that’s needed as an argument, but apparently not. These things are dangerous fantasies, because talent comes from everywhere (and it often doesn’t conform to any given government’s ideology, either). I have a strong feeling that the current Hungarian government would be denouncing John von Neumann as a secret agent of George Soros were he or his like alive today. And they’re doing their best to make sure that the country never produces another such figure, which is a loss for the human race.
Here’s another example of nationalism at work, this time in drug research. The Chinese government is apparently planning to drop requirements for safety and efficacy testing of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) therapies....
MORE: http://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/arc...ap-is-this
Scientific Research Misconduct vs. Fraud: How to Tell the Difference
https://www.healthcarelawtoday.com/2018/...ifference/
EXCERPT: For years, misconduct in scientific research was policed primarily by the Office of Research Integrity (ORI) at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. After a lengthy and confidential review, an institution suspected of producing false or fraudulent research was either cleared of the charges or required to issue retractions and pay back any federal grants that had been tainted by misconduct.
In recent years, two new players have entered the field: The Department of Justice (DOJ) and private whistleblowers. Driven partly by a University of Iowa scandal that caught the attention of Sen. Charles Grassley, the DOJ has become more aggressive in pursuing False Claims Act (FCA) cases against research institutions where researchers have been accused of misconduct. Private whistleblowers, sometimes financed by law firms specializing in such qui tam litigation, are also bringing suits, galvanized by the treble damages offered under the FCA and bounties of up to 30% of anything the government recovers.
[...] These new threats force research institutions to confront vexing questions: When does research cross the line from sloppy or even deliberately false, to a potential FCA violation? And how early must administrators and lawyers intervene to prevent the former from becoming the latter? [...] Unfortunately, there are no firm rules to distinguish scientific misconduct from deliberate fraud, but experience suggests some basic principles....
MORE: https://www.healthcarelawtoday.com/2018/...ifference/
http://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/arc...ap-is-this
EXCERPT: . . . Which is why it’s disquieting to see this sort of thing. That article reports that the (quite nationalist) government in Hungary is causing trouble for universities there, specifically the Central European University, accusing it and some of its faculty members of being in the pay of opponents of the government. It’s especially sad to see the national science funding agency participate in such actions. Hungarian scientists were a profound influence on the 20th century; the country produced a run of mathematicians, physicists, biologists, and chemists that had colleagues at Los Alamos joking that they must be Martians in disguise. But they didn’t get to that point by trying to do only Pure Hungarian Research, because there’s no such thing.
No more than there is Pure American, Pure German, or Pure Chinese Research.A look at what Germany did to its own scientific establishment under the National Socialist government should be all that’s needed as an argument, but apparently not. These things are dangerous fantasies, because talent comes from everywhere (and it often doesn’t conform to any given government’s ideology, either). I have a strong feeling that the current Hungarian government would be denouncing John von Neumann as a secret agent of George Soros were he or his like alive today. And they’re doing their best to make sure that the country never produces another such figure, which is a loss for the human race.
Here’s another example of nationalism at work, this time in drug research. The Chinese government is apparently planning to drop requirements for safety and efficacy testing of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) therapies....
MORE: http://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/arc...ap-is-this
Scientific Research Misconduct vs. Fraud: How to Tell the Difference
https://www.healthcarelawtoday.com/2018/...ifference/
EXCERPT: For years, misconduct in scientific research was policed primarily by the Office of Research Integrity (ORI) at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. After a lengthy and confidential review, an institution suspected of producing false or fraudulent research was either cleared of the charges or required to issue retractions and pay back any federal grants that had been tainted by misconduct.
In recent years, two new players have entered the field: The Department of Justice (DOJ) and private whistleblowers. Driven partly by a University of Iowa scandal that caught the attention of Sen. Charles Grassley, the DOJ has become more aggressive in pursuing False Claims Act (FCA) cases against research institutions where researchers have been accused of misconduct. Private whistleblowers, sometimes financed by law firms specializing in such qui tam litigation, are also bringing suits, galvanized by the treble damages offered under the FCA and bounties of up to 30% of anything the government recovers.
[...] These new threats force research institutions to confront vexing questions: When does research cross the line from sloppy or even deliberately false, to a potential FCA violation? And how early must administrators and lawyers intervene to prevent the former from becoming the latter? [...] Unfortunately, there are no firm rules to distinguish scientific misconduct from deliberate fraud, but experience suggests some basic principles....
MORE: https://www.healthcarelawtoday.com/2018/...ifference/