Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Omaha Steve

(99,655 posts)
Wed Jul 2, 2014, 11:06 AM Jul 2014

Scientists withdraw claim about making stem cells

Source: AP-Excite

NEW YORK (AP) — Scientists who reported that they'd found a startlingly simple way to make stem cells withdrew that claim Wednesday, admitting to "extensive" errors in the research.

In two papers published in January in the journal Nature, the researchers said that they'd been able to transform ordinary mouse cells into versatile stem cells by exposing them to a mildly acidic environment. Scientists hope to harness stem cells to grow replacement tissue for treating a variety of diseases.

While scientists have long been able to perform such transformations with a different method, the newly reported technique was far simpler, and the paper gained wide notice — and some skepticism — in the research community. It was also widely reported in the media, including by The Associated Press.

But before long, the government-funded Riken Center for Developmental Biology in Japan accused one of its scientists, Haruko Obokata, of falsifying data in the research. She was key author of the papers.

FULL story at link.


Read more: http://apnews.excite.com/article/20140702/us-sci--stem_cell_retraction-df7307293e.html



Online:
Nature: http://www.nature.com/nature
12 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

valerief

(53,235 posts)
1. What to believe? That scientists can't make stem cells--or--that scientists can but
Wed Jul 2, 2014, 11:10 AM
Jul 2014

were persuaded by Big Pharma to state they'd made errors.

Warpy

(111,267 posts)
3. This is what peer review is all about
Wed Jul 2, 2014, 11:19 AM
Jul 2014

And believe it, they can't make universal stem cells out of anything but undifferentiated embryonic cells.

Igel

(35,317 posts)
10. Well, that's embarrassing.
Wed Jul 2, 2014, 12:57 PM
Jul 2014

Peer review is supposed to happen some time between submission of the article and publication.

Some peer reviewers engaged in a bit of motivated thinking, it would seem. "I really want this to be true--wouldn't it be cool? This may be a problem ... but then it's not valid research, so I won't dig here. And there ... No, let's leave that alone. Plus I have to go home for dinner and there's this grad student who needs advising and a grant to be written and early admissions review committee and the conference abstract I need to send off and proofsheets to review and ..."

Much better to catch a mistake early based on methodology than have somebody outside of the review process catch it or, even worse, waste resources failing to replicate the results.

Warpy

(111,267 posts)
11. No kidding, they're supposed to try to reproduce the results or confirm the methods
Wed Jul 2, 2014, 03:31 PM
Jul 2014

before they accept it for publication. They so wanted to use something besides little snowflake babies in a petri dish that they forgot that step.

It's not the first time, it's how Wakefield slipped through, too. People were so desperate for a simple answer to what caused autism that they rushed him into publication. Look how that one turned out.

eggplant

(3,911 posts)
5. "While scientists have long been able to perform such transformations with a different method..."
Wed Jul 2, 2014, 11:41 AM
Jul 2014

Um, that scientists *can*, but these scientists can't.

SansACause

(520 posts)
2. It seemed impossible
Wed Jul 2, 2014, 11:15 AM
Jul 2014

When I read those papers initially, it seemed impossibly simple. But it would have helped with work in my lab. I'm glad this retraction came out before I tried to repeat their results.

HuskyOffset

(889 posts)
7. I guess this means . . .
Wed Jul 2, 2014, 12:08 PM
Jul 2014

. . . that since this scientist faked her data we know that scientists fake their data, and since the people telling us that global warming is real and man-caused are scientists, we are led to the inescapable conclusion that global warming is fake. How soon before someone actually tries to claim that?

question everything

(47,485 posts)
12. This is too bad. Scientists don't need this kind of news
Thu Jul 3, 2014, 03:10 PM
Jul 2014

to contribute to all the "bad science" bashing.

Science has advanced our life in the past 100 years and it does not deserve to be trashed by bad apples, or by clueless members of Congress with their "fleece" awards and hauling a Nobel laureate to explain how he conducts research.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Scientists withdraw claim...