Hwang woo suk biography template

•

Fraud and Misconduct

Completion requirements

2. Examples of Fraud in Clinical Research

2.1. Example 1: Korean Stem-Cell Case, Woo-Suk Hwang

Between 2004 and 2005, Professor Woo-Suk Hwang, a highly regarded, highly funded South Korean researcher at Seoul National University, achieved international fame for his work on embryonic stem cells and the promises his findings offered. Considered a national hero, he had surprised the world with his report of creating 11 patient specific stem cell lines. His reputation was quickly destroyed, however, and his research activities were halted when his success in somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT – a method of ‘cloning’) became mired in scandal, particularly when it emerged that many of his data on SCNT were made up. He lost his university position and his two important papers on embryonic stem cell research had to be retracted from the journal ‘Science’.

Several ethics violations were committed by his team members during the course of th

•

Timeline of a controversy

Woo Suk Hwang faces questions.© Empics

Concerns about ethics, errors (accidental or intentional) and possible fraud have dogged the stem-cell researcher Woo Suk Hwang, from Seoul National University in South Korea, since his landmark 2004 Science paper on stem cells from a cloned human embryo. Here news@nature.com describes how events have unfolded from that initial paper - with the most recent events presented first (you may want to read from the bottom-up the first time you read this). Keep checking back for updates over the coming weeks.

31 October 2006

A confident and defiant Hwang takes the stand for the first time in court. The defence denies allegations of fraud and embezzlement, and has prepared a case against the charge of violating the bioethics law for the next hearing. A verdict may be handed down by the end of the year.

12 May 2006

Hwang is indicted today on three charges. The Seoul Central District prosecutor’s office charges him w

•

Abstract

Scientific misconduct and fraud occur in science. The (anonymous) peer review process serves as goalkeeper of scientific quality rather than scientific integrity. In this brief paper we describe some limitations of the peer-review process. We describe the catastrophic facts of the ‘Woo-Suk Hwang fraud case’ and raise some ethical concerns about the issue. Finally, we pay attention to plagiarism, autoplagiarism and double publications. (Neth Heart J 2009;17:25-9.)

Keywords: double publications, fraud, scientific misconduct, peer review; plagiarism, stem fängelse research

Unfortunately, fraud exists in science and several examples and degrees in terms of severity have been described.¹ Fraud should not be confused with publication bias, which concerns both the tendency to overpublication of studies with a positive outcome and the opposite for studies with a negativ outcome, including the unconscious incentives of the researchers involved. The theoretical aspects of the la