The Legacy of the Hwang Case: Research Misconduct in Biosciences

This paper focuses on the infamous case of Hwang Woo Suk, the South-Korean national hero and once celebrated pioneer of stem cell research. After briefly discussing the evolution of his publication and research scandal in Science, I will attempt to outline the main reactions that emerged within scientific and bioethical discourses on the problem of research misconduct in contemporary biosciences. What were the ethical lapses in his research? What kind of research misconduct has been identified? How this kind of misconduct affects scientific integrity? How to avoid it? Focusing on these questions, the paper interprets the Hwang’s case as a case study that might shed light on the worst aspects of highstakes global science. This case presents a group of problems that might endanger scientific integrity and public trust. Regulatory oversight, ethical requirements and institutional safeguards are often viewed by the scientific community as merely decelerating scientific progress and causing delays in the application of treatments. The Hwang’s case represents how unimpeded progress works in contemporary science. Thus, the case might shed light on the often neglected benefits of “the social control of science”.

[1]  Jin Mee Kim,et al.  Patient-Specific Embryonic Stem Cells Derived from Human SCNT Blastocysts , 2005, Science.

[2]  E. Check Where now for stem-cell cloners? , 2005, Nature.

[3]  Nicholas Wade,et al.  It may look authentic; here's how to tell it isn't: a scientific journal shows the way in a new offensive against fraud. , 2006, The New York times on the Web.

[4]  P. W. Bowman,et al.  PHS Public Health Service , 1963 .

[5]  Melissa S. Anderson Collective Openness and Other Recommendations for the Promotion of Research Integrity , 2007, Sci. Eng. Ethics.

[6]  R. Triendl,et al.  South Korean policy failure and the Hwang debacle , 2006, Nature Biotechnology.

[7]  Douglas G Altman,et al.  Ghost Authorship in Industry-Initiated Randomised Trials , 2007, PLoS medicine.

[8]  M. Nylenna,et al.  Handling of scientific dishonesty in the Nordic countries , 1999, The Lancet.

[9]  Mildred K. Cho,et al.  Lessons of the Stem Cell Scandal , 2006, Science.

[10]  J. DuMond,et al.  An Introduction to Scientific Research , 1953 .

[11]  Richard Smith,et al.  Research Misconduct: The Poisoning of the Well , 2006, Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine.

[12]  D. Rennie,et al.  The contributions of authors. , 2000, JAMA.

[13]  R. Dresser Defining research misconduct: will we know it when we see it? , 2001, The Hastings Center report.

[14]  Sung Keun Kang,et al.  Evidence of a Pluripotent Human Embryonic Stem Cell Line Derived from a Cloned Blastocyst , 2004, Science.

[15]  D. Langenberg Impetus for NSF Policy , 1995 .

[16]  Melissa S. Anderson,et al.  Normal Misbehavior: Scientists Talk about the Ethics of Research , 2006, Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE.

[17]  D. Rennie,et al.  When authorship fails. A proposal to make contributors accountable. , 1997, JAMA.

[18]  Goo Jang,et al.  Dogs cloned from adult somatic cells , 2005, Nature.

[19]  E. Snyder,et al.  Beyond fraud--stem-cell research continues. , 2006, New England Journal of Medicine.

[20]  Frans Van de Werf,et al.  An international randomized trial comparing four thrombolytic strategies for acute myocardial infarction. , 1993, The New England journal of medicine.

[21]  R Smith,et al.  Time to redefine authorship , 1996, BMJ.

[22]  F. Hafferty,et al.  The hidden curriculum, ethics teaching, and the structure of medical education , 1994, Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges.

[23]  Melissa S. Anderson,et al.  Scientists behaving badly , 2005, Nature.

[24]  S. S. Blancett,et al.  Integrity and misconduct in research. , 1996, The Journal of nursing administration.