'Verdicts' Are in on the Gallo Probe
Science. 1992 May 8; 256(5058): 735-739.
For two-and-a-half long years, a small cadre of scientists have been struggling to make sense of what has become one of the most complicated, contentious, and depressing scientific misconduct investigations ever: whether or not Robert C. Gallo and his colleagues were guilty of scientific misconduct for the way they conducted and then reported the crucial experiments that led to the development of a diagnostic blood test for HIV, the virus that causes AIDS. Now the "verdicts" of those scientists are in -- in two forms: the final report of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Office of Scientific Integrity (OSI) authored by one set of scientists, and a critique of that report authored by a panel of eminent researchers not directly associated with NIH....Many scientists may feel less worried, however, about Gallo's future than about the damage this tragedy may be doing to the public trust, as it continues to produce acrimony within the scientific community.
Accountability; Aids; Aids Serodiagnosis; Biomedical Research; Blood; Federal Government; Forms; Fraud; Government; Government Regulation; Health; Information Dissemination; International Aspects; Investigators; Misconduct; Patents; Peer Review; Records; Regulation; Research; Researchers; Review; Scientific Misconduct; Social Impact; Trust;
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
Gallo, Joseph J.; Straton, Joseph B.; Klag, Michael J.; Meoni, Lucy A.; Sulmasy, Daniel P.; Wang, Nae-yuh; Ford, Daniel E. (2003-07)
Physical Functioning, Depression, and Preferences for Treatment at the End of Life: The Johns Hopkins Precursors Study Straton, Joseph B.; Wang, Nae-Yuh; Meoni, Lucy A.; Ford, Daniel E.; Klag, Michael J.; Casarett, David; Gallo, Joseph J. (2004-04)