Difference between revisions of "Class Journal Week 6"

From LMU BioDB 2017
Jump to: navigation, search
(formatting error)
(→‎Zachary Van Ysseldyk's Responses)
 
(13 intermediate revisions by 7 users not shown)
Line 9: Line 9:
 
{{Template:Zvanysse}}
 
{{Template:Zvanysse}}
  
 +
== Arash Lari's Responses ==
 +
#I had never heard about this case prior to this video.
 +
#I was surprised that there weren't objective measures in place to verify the data at such a prestigious university. Especially for something so big and groundbreaking, you would expect a lot of scrutiny to make sure they don't run into a PR disaster like they did.
 +
#It wasn't until unbiased third parties were able to review the data that the phubbed data was discovered.
 +
#How on earth did he successfully convince anyone to hire him ever again?
 +
[[User:ArashLari|ArashLari]] ([[User talk:ArashLari|talk]]) 19:24, 14 October 2017 (PDT)
 +
{{Template:ArashLari}}
  
 
==QLanners Responses==
 
==QLanners Responses==
Line 31: Line 38:
  
 
==Aporras1's Responses==
 
==Aporras1's Responses==
−
#’’’Were you aware of this case of research fraud before viewing this video?’’’ I wasn’t ever aware of this case of research fraud before watching the video.
+
#Were you aware of this case of research fraud before viewing this video? I wasn’t ever aware of this case of research fraud before watching the video.
−
#’’’What are your initial reactions to hearing about this case?’’’ My initial reactions were in absolute astonishment. Not only because of how someone could fabricate data sets which resulted in patients not receiving the best possible care, but also how it managed to continue after a reviewing committee.  
+
#What are your initial reactions to hearing about this case? My initial reactions were in absolute astonishment. Not only because of how someone could fabricate data sets which resulted in patients not receiving the best possible care, but also how it managed to continue after a reviewing committee.  
−
#’’’What role did data sharing play in uncovering this fraud?’’’ Data sharing allowed for other individuals to test the data sets and results. Once others could access the data, they found many errors which were alarming and were able to tell others of these errors to halt the program.
+
#What role did data sharing play in uncovering this fraud? Data sharing allowed for other individuals to test the data sets and results. Once others could access the data, they found many errors which were alarming and were able to tell others of these errors to halt the program.
−
#’’’What additional information would you like to know about this case? (We will be visiting it again in subsequent weeks in the course.)’’’ I was interested to find out where Dr. Potti is now and I’m amazed he is still able to do research until 2020 under supervision. Ultimately I would like to know if there have been any changes in research policy (either Duke’s or other institutions).
+
#What additional information would you like to know about this case? (We will be visiting it again in subsequent weeks in the course.) I was interested to find out where Dr. Potti is now and I’m amazed he is still able to do research until 2020 under supervision. Ultimately I would like to know if there have been any changes in research policy (either Duke’s or other institutions).
  
 
[[User:Aporras1|Aporras1]] ([[User talk:Aporras1|talk]]) 13:02, 9 October 2017 (PDT)
 
[[User:Aporras1|Aporras1]] ([[User talk:Aporras1|talk]]) 13:02, 9 October 2017 (PDT)
Line 65: Line 72:
 
[[User:Mbalducc|Mbalducc]] ([[User talk:Mbalducc|talk]]) 17:02, 9 October 2017 (PDT)
 
[[User:Mbalducc|Mbalducc]] ([[User talk:Mbalducc|talk]]) 17:02, 9 October 2017 (PDT)
  
 +
==Eddie Azinge's Responses==
 +
#’’’Were you aware of this case of research fraud before viewing this video?’’’ I was not aware of this case of research fraud before viewing the video.
 +
#’’’What are your initial reactions to hearing about this case?’’’ Initially, I was confused, what would Potti stand to gain from revealing fraudulent information about a technically revolutionary process for treating cancer patients; eventually it would be exposed that the process wasn't nearly as effective as it was predicted to be, causing his reputation to be significantly damaged in the long run. After viewing the content again from a different perspective, however, I realized that the real value in faking the data came from the money that Dr. Potti and Duke stood to make from the process.
 +
#’’’What role did data sharing play in uncovering this fraud?’’’ It was only because other researchers were able to test Potti's data sets that the general sense that Potti was releasing useless information was revealed.
 +
#’’’What additional information would you like to know about this case? (We will be visiting it again in subsequent weeks in the course.)’’’ What preventative measures has Duke taken to ensure that a blunder of this scale is never reproduced again?
 +
 +
[[User:Cazinge|Cazinge]] ([[User talk:Cazinge|talk]]) 22:29, 9 October 2017 (PDT)
  
 
==Blair Hamilton==
 
==Blair Hamilton==
Line 87: Line 101:
 
[[User:Kwrigh35|Kwrigh35]] ([[User talk:Kwrigh35|talk]]) 19:00, 9 October 2017 (PDT)
 
[[User:Kwrigh35|Kwrigh35]] ([[User talk:Kwrigh35|talk]]) 19:00, 9 October 2017 (PDT)
  
−
== Nicole Kalcic's Responses ]==
+
== Nicole Kalcic's Responses ==
 
#I was not aware of this case before watching the video.
 
#I was not aware of this case before watching the video.
 
#I was mostly shocked. It is sad and strange to me that things like this can happen without anyone noticing for a long time. It is shocking to think about the people that we trust daily, who could be manipulating situations like this. I feel terrible for the people affected who must have been emotionally affected by this.  
 
#I was mostly shocked. It is sad and strange to me that things like this can happen without anyone noticing for a long time. It is shocking to think about the people that we trust daily, who could be manipulating situations like this. I feel terrible for the people affected who must have been emotionally affected by this.  
Line 95: Line 109:
 
[[User:Nicolekalcic|Nicolekalcic]] ([[User talk:Nicolekalcic|talk]]) 20:31, 9 October 2017 (PDT)
 
[[User:Nicolekalcic|Nicolekalcic]] ([[User talk:Nicolekalcic|talk]]) 20:31, 9 October 2017 (PDT)
  
 +
==Emma Tyrnauer's Responses==
 +
#I was not aware of this case before viewing the video.
 +
#I was kind of angered after hearing about this case, especially because cancer patients that were a part of these trials could have been receiving the wrong drugs. Moreover, these patients had developed hope and put trust in this research.
 +
#Data sharing allowed other scientists/researchers to study the data and do their own analysis and verification. This allowed them to identify the "odd things that just couldn't be explained," e.i., the manipulations.
 +
#I'd like to know more about the publication process of scientific papers and how no one was able to detect the manipulations in these papers prior to publication.
 +
[[User:Emmatyrnauer|Emmatyrnauer]] ([[User talk:Emmatyrnauer|talk]]) 21:59, 9 October 2017 (PDT)
 +
{{Emmatyrnauer}}
 +
==Hayden Hinsch's Answers==
 +
#I did not know about this case of research fraud before the viewing of this video.
 +
#I was pretty dissapointed that one, this would happen at such a prestigious university and two, that it didn't surprise me that a research fraud like this would happen.
 +
#Data sharing played the ultimate role in uncovering this fraud. If the data was not shared, the other doctors would not have been able to find the discrepancies in the findings.
 +
#I would like to know about the consequences of this fraud. What has happened to Duke, and to Dr. Potti? I know he is still practicing, but why haven't his credentials been stripped? I would also like to know what consequences this has had on the area of cancer research as a whole.
 +
[[User:Hhinsch|Hhinsch]] ([[User talk:Hhinsch|talk]]) 22:46, 9 October 2017 (PDT)
 +
{{hhinsch}}
 
[[Category:Shared]] <br>
 
[[Category:Shared]] <br>
 +
 +
==Simon Wroblewski's Responses==
 +
#I was not at all aware of this case research fraud before viewing the video.
 +
#I was both shocked and disappointed in Duke University's lacks of ethics and care for their community. It is an inexcusable behavior by Dr. Anil Potti to put his reputation as a scientist before the lives of his patients.
 +
#Data sharing played a key role in discovering the data manipulation that Dr. Anil Potti performed. Which ultimately led to the manipulation of his patients trust.
 +
#I'd like to know more about the organizations that reviewed his data before publication in order to understand the oversight that occurred. I'd also like to know what Dr. Potti believed he would achieve after frauding his data.
 +
[[User:Simonwro120|Simonwro120]] ([[User talk:Simonwro120|talk]]) 22:56, 9 October 2017 (PDT)
 +
{{simonwro120}}
 +
 +
==Dina Bashoura's Responses==
 +
#No, I was unaware of this case of fraud before viewing the video.
 +
# I was disappointed that Potti turned to manipulating the data just to publish his work and that he would potentially be giving the patients the wrong medication that would be doing the opposite of what they saw him for. That saddens me because the man and his wife really believed that his treatment would work and developed such hope for recovery.
 +
# Data sharing was the main reason that Potti's fraud was discovered. It was that shared data that led to the discovery of the manipulated data that Potti had done.
 +
#I would like to know if Dr. Nevans actually was unaware of the fraud Dr. Potti had committed. I ask this because Dr. Nevans was Potti's mentor so Dr. Nevans must have been aware of the work he was doing and the data he was collecting. Dr. Nevans mentions that he wanted to believe the data was correct for the sake of the cancer community and the potential that it had, which makes me skeptical.
 +
[[User:Dbashour|Dbashour]] ([[User talk:Dbashour|talk]]) 23:56, 9 October 2017 (PDT)
 +
 +
{{template:Dbashour}}

Latest revision as of 02:24, 15 October 2017

Zachary Van Ysseldyk's Responses

  1. No, I had no idea about this case before watching the video.
  2. My initial reaction was really of shock. I am amazed that someone would willingly manipulate data, especially when it comes to people's lives. I also was shocked that Duke did not react sooner and that they were so naive to believe Potti.
  3. The data was reviewed by some employees at Duke, however despite suspicion, they still took Potti's word and believed him. After finding the same mistakes over and over again, they finally submitted it to an outside source to be reviewed. Also the national cancer institute had problems with his data.
  4. I would like to know on what legal grounds Potti is free from having his license stripped from him. Also, as of 2012 it says that Potti is working for a North Dakota cancer center. I would like to know how anyone decided to hire him purely out of liability reasons.

Zvanysse (talk) 18:27, 8 October 2017 (PDT)

Zvanysse

BIOL/CMSI 367-01: Biological Databases Fall 2017

Assignments

Week 1 | Week 2 | Week 3 | Week 4 | Week 5 | Week 6 | Week 7 | Week 8 | Week 9 | Week 10 | Week 11 | Week 12 | Week 14

Individual Assignments

Zvanysse Week 1 | Zvanysse Week 2 | Zvanysse Week 3 | Zvanysse Week 4 | Zvanysse Week 5 | Zvanysse Week 6 | Zvanysse Week 7 | Zvanysse Week 8 | Zvanysse Week 9 | Zvanysse Week 10 | Zvanysse Week 11 | Zvanysse Week 12 | Zvanysse Week 14 | Zvanysse Week 15

Shared Journals

Zvanysse Week 1 Journal | Zvanysse Week 2 Journal | Zvanysse Week 3 Journal | Zvanysse Week 4 Journal | Zvanysse Week 5 Journal | Zvanysse Week 6 Journal | Zvanysse Week 7 Journal | Zvanysse Week 8 Journal | Zvanysse Week 9 Journal | Zvanysse Week 10 Journal | Zvanysse Week 11 Journal | Zvanysse Week 12 Journal | Zvanysse Week 14 Journal

Arash Lari's Responses

  1. I had never heard about this case prior to this video.
  2. I was surprised that there weren't objective measures in place to verify the data at such a prestigious university. Especially for something so big and groundbreaking, you would expect a lot of scrutiny to make sure they don't run into a PR disaster like they did.
  3. It wasn't until unbiased third parties were able to review the data that the phubbed data was discovered.
  4. How on earth did he successfully convince anyone to hire him ever again?

ArashLari (talk) 19:24, 14 October 2017 (PDT) Arash Lari

BIOL/CMSI 367-01: Biological Databases Fall 2017

Assignments


Journal Entries:

Shared Journals:

QLanners Responses

  1. I did not know about this case of research fraud before this video.
  2. I was very surprised after hearing about this case of research fraud. First of all, it is incredible that an individual (in this case Dr. Potti) was willing to put people's health at risk and lie to people in order to try to gain fame and fortune. But perhaps even more surprising is that it took so long for somebody to finally check the validity of the original data that led to all of the findings. It's incredible that the very foundation of the whole discovery was not scrutinized and checked by more people.
  3. It was the initial scrutiny of two individuals at a separate cancer center that raised initial concerns about the findings. And it was ultimately the find from an editor of a small cancer newsletter that found the tip by looking at Dr. Potti's background. All of these findings speak to how data sharing is crucial to validate findings; as the more people that can validate and check the authenticity of data and findings from data, the more reliable to findings are.
  4. I would be interested in knowing what kinds of effects (if any) this case of fraud had on the necessary protocols for validating data in research studies (especially related to medical findings).

Qlanners (talk) 23:05, 8 October 2017 (PDT)

Main Page
User Page
Assignment Pages: Week 1 | Week 2 | Week 3 | Week 4 | Week 5 | Week 6 | Week 7 | Week 8 | Week 9 | Week 10 | Week 11 | Week 12 | Week 14 | Week 15
Journal Entry Pages: Week 1 | Week 2 | Week 3 | Week 4 | Week 5 | Week 6 | Week 7 | Week 8 | Week 9 | Week 10 | Week 11 | Week 12 | Week 14 | Week 15
Shared Journal Pages: Week 1 | Week 2 | Week 3 | Week 4 | Week 5 | Week 6 | Week 7 | Week 8 | Week 9 | Week 10
Group Project Page: JASPAR the Friendly Ghost


Corinne Wong's Responses

  1. No, I was unaware of this case of research fraud before watching this video.
  2. It’s crazy to think how long he got away with his manipulation. It’s hard to understand why someone would take advantage of people at a desperate and vulnerable position, like cancer, just to make money and get recognized. Moreover, he should have known he would get caught at some point, especially since he made his treatment seem so successful. He would’ve had to have known people would be suspicious if he advertises an 80% success rate when it constantly fails.
  3. Data sharing allowed people to access the original data, which revealed the fraud. People could clearly see how the advertised data was manipulated to benefit his research.
  4. I would be interested in learning more about the process of uncovering the data. Was the true data really just there and easy to access for people, but they just didn’t think to double check his work?

Cwong34 (talk) 12:39, 9 October 2017 (PDT)

cwong34

BIOL/CMSI 367-01: Biological Databases Fall 2017

Assignments

Journal Entries:

Shared Journals:

Group Project

Aporras1's Responses

  1. Were you aware of this case of research fraud before viewing this video? I wasn’t ever aware of this case of research fraud before watching the video.
  2. What are your initial reactions to hearing about this case? My initial reactions were in absolute astonishment. Not only because of how someone could fabricate data sets which resulted in patients not receiving the best possible care, but also how it managed to continue after a reviewing committee.
  3. What role did data sharing play in uncovering this fraud? Data sharing allowed for other individuals to test the data sets and results. Once others could access the data, they found many errors which were alarming and were able to tell others of these errors to halt the program.
  4. What additional information would you like to know about this case? (We will be visiting it again in subsequent weeks in the course.) I was interested to find out where Dr. Potti is now and I’m amazed he is still able to do research until 2020 under supervision. Ultimately I would like to know if there have been any changes in research policy (either Duke’s or other institutions).

Aporras1 (talk) 13:02, 9 October 2017 (PDT)

User Page: Antonio Porras

Assignments

  1. Week 1 Assignment
  2. Week 2 Assignment
  3. Week 3 Assignment
  4. Week 4 Assignment
  5. Week 5 Assignment
  6. Week 6 Assignment
  7. Week 7 Assignment
  8. Week 8 Assignment
  9. Week 9 Assignment
  10. Week 10 Assignment
  11. Week 11 Assignment
  12. Week 12 Assignment
  13. Week 14 Assignment
  14. Week 15 Assignment

Individual Journal Entries

  1. Week 1
  2. Week 2
  3. Week 3
  4. Week 4
  5. Week 5
  6. Week 6
  7. Week 7
  8. Week 8
  9. Week 9
  10. Week 10
  11. Week 11
  12. Week 12
  13. Week 14
  14. Week 15

Class Journal Entries

  1. Class Journal Week 1
  2. Class Journal Week 2
  3. Class Journal Week 3
  4. Class Journal Week 4
  5. Class Journal Week 5
  6. Class Journal Week 6
  7. Class Journal Week 7
  8. Class Journal Week 8
  9. Class Journal Week 9
  10. Class Journal Week 10

Team Page

  1. JASPAR the Friendly Ghost

Individual Assessment and Reflection

  1. Individual Assessment and Reflection

John Lopez's Responses

Questions

  1. I was not aware of this case of research fraud before using this video. Honestly, I had no idea that Dr. Potti could have fabricated data like that for so long without anyone to check or notice.
  2. My initial reactions to hearing about this case consisted mostly of surprise and disgust. As I stated in the previous question, I was unaware that cases like this could even happen, for I would have imagined that somebody would check the data he used. I was also upset with the doctor for even attempting something so deceitful.
  3. Had his data been shared previously, it would have been possible to discover that the data was fabricated much earlier than it did. The lack of data sharing is precisely what made Dr. Potti’s scheme last as long as it did.
  4. While I would not like to know more about this specific incident, I would like to know if there have been other cases of suspected data fraud which have been investigated.

Johnllopez616 (talk) 16:15, 9 October 2017 (PDT) Individual Journal Entries and Assignments

Class Assignments

Class Weekly Journal Entries / Project Weekly Journal Entries

My Page

Edward Bachoura's Response

  1. I was not aware of this case before watching the video.
  2. After watching the video, I was solely focused on how long he was able to get away with doing this. It's so sad to see someone feed off of the desperation of these people who are in need of help, but manipulating the data.
  3. Well if it weren't for data sharing, it is possible that he might still doing the same manipulation of data and people that he was able to get away with for long. If it weren't for the employees at Duke reviewing his data, his fraudulent actions would've gone unnoticed for who knows how long.
  4. I would like to know more information about Potti after he was discovered and before he ended up in North Dakota

Ebachour (talk) 16:38, 9 October 2017 (PDT)

Mary Balducci

  1. I wasn't aware of this case of research fraud before watching the video.
  2. My initial reaction to hearing about this case is surprise and concern. I'm shocked that someone would even attempt to do this, and I'm concerned that he was able to get away with it for so long with no one stopping him.
  3. Data sharing is what allowed this fraud to be uncovered. It allowed people and scientists to go over the data, and see how it was clearly manipulated.
  4. I'd like to know more about how no one stopped him for so long. Why did people working with him trust him so much despite the rumors and questions coming their way? I'd like to know if it was because they wanted to make money, or because they were caught up in the excitement of the idea curing cancer.

Mbalducc (talk) 17:02, 9 October 2017 (PDT)

Eddie Azinge's Responses

  1. ’’’Were you aware of this case of research fraud before viewing this video?’’’ I was not aware of this case of research fraud before viewing the video.
  2. ’’’What are your initial reactions to hearing about this case?’’’ Initially, I was confused, what would Potti stand to gain from revealing fraudulent information about a technically revolutionary process for treating cancer patients; eventually it would be exposed that the process wasn't nearly as effective as it was predicted to be, causing his reputation to be significantly damaged in the long run. After viewing the content again from a different perspective, however, I realized that the real value in faking the data came from the money that Dr. Potti and Duke stood to make from the process.
  3. ’’’What role did data sharing play in uncovering this fraud?’’’ It was only because other researchers were able to test Potti's data sets that the general sense that Potti was releasing useless information was revealed.
  4. ’’’What additional information would you like to know about this case? (We will be visiting it again in subsequent weeks in the course.)’’’ What preventative measures has Duke taken to ensure that a blunder of this scale is never reproduced again?

Cazinge (talk) 22:29, 9 October 2017 (PDT)

Blair Hamilton

  1. Were you aware of this case of research fraud before viewing this video?
    • I was not aware of the this case prior to this video.
  2. What are your initial reactions to hearing about this case?
    • I would say I'm sad and shocked. Sad because here is a large group of vulnerable people hoping to receive top tier care, and instead get a random draw of cancer treatments. And secondly shock because I am amazed that someone would fabricate data on such a life threatening and sensitive subject such as cancer patients.
  3. What role did data sharing play in uncovering this fraud?
    • I believe that data sharing held the researchers and Duke accountable to the research they were posing to be not only true but "advanced clinical trials." Without data sharing the researchers and Duke could have made tons of money on a project that needed to be stopped sooner rather than later as patient's lives were greatly affected.
  4. What additional information would you like to know about this case?
    • I would love to known about the trials that decided the data was true as well as after it was decided false. I would also like to know how many patients/clinical trials were affected by the program. Lastly, I would like to learn about how the other researchers were able to see the data had be forged or changed, i.e. what were there steps to finding out that the data wasn't lining up.

Bhamilton18 (talk) 18:53, 9 October 2017 (PDT)

Category Links
User Page Blair Hamilton
Weekly Assignments Bhamilton18 Week 2   Bhamilton18 Week 3   Bhamilton18 Week 4  Animal QTL  Bhamilton18 Week 6  Bhamilton18 Week 7  Bhamilton18 Week 8  Bhamilton18 Week 9  Bhamilton18 Week 10  Bhamilton18 Week 11  Bhamilton18 Week 12  Bhamilton18 Week 14  Bhamilton18 Week 15
Weekly Assignment
Instructions		 Week 1   Week 2   Week 3   Week 4   Week 5   Week 6   Week 7   Week 8   Week 9   Week 10   Week 11   Week 12   Week 14   Week 15
Class Journals Class Journal Week 1   Class Journal Week 2   Class Journal Week 3   Class Journal Week 4   Class Journal Week 5   Class Journal Week 6   Class Journal Week 7   Class Journal Week 8   Class Journal Week 9   Class Journal Week 10
Final Project Lights, Camera, InterACTION!  Lights, Camera, InterACTION! Deliverables

Katie Wright

  1. I was not aware of this case of fraud before watching the video.
  2. My initial reaction was disappointment and sadness. I was disappointed that such a well regarded institution could be duped the way that Duke was, and I was sad for the 112 patients & their families who were given false hope.
  3. Data sharing was crucial in the uncovering of this fraud. It was especially important that the statisticians in Texas were given all of the data; if they were only given the manipulated data, no one would have caught the fraud.
  4. I would like to know how the data was stored. Did Dr. Potti store the original data separately from the manipulated data? and how were the statisticians in Texas given all of the data, while the data given the the independent reviewers only partial data?

Kwrigh35 (talk) 19:00, 9 October 2017 (PDT)

Nicole Kalcic's Responses

  1. I was not aware of this case before watching the video.
  2. I was mostly shocked. It is sad and strange to me that things like this can happen without anyone noticing for a long time. It is shocking to think about the people that we trust daily, who could be manipulating situations like this. I feel terrible for the people affected who must have been emotionally affected by this.
  3. Data sharing was integral to finding the truth here. Researchers were able to attempt to verify the data they had been given and find errors that allowed them to uncover this fraud. Data sharing should have been a part of this process the entire time.
  4. I doubt what I am curious about is information that is available, but I do wonder what the initial reaction of everyone involved on this case was, including the patients. It makes me anxious to think about.

Nicolekalcic (talk) 20:31, 9 October 2017 (PDT)

Emma Tyrnauer's Responses

  1. I was not aware of this case before viewing the video.
  2. I was kind of angered after hearing about this case, especially because cancer patients that were a part of these trials could have been receiving the wrong drugs. Moreover, these patients had developed hope and put trust in this research.
  3. Data sharing allowed other scientists/researchers to study the data and do their own analysis and verification. This allowed them to identify the "odd things that just couldn't be explained," e.i., the manipulations.
  4. I'd like to know more about the publication process of scientific papers and how no one was able to detect the manipulations in these papers prior to publication.

Emmatyrnauer (talk) 21:59, 9 October 2017 (PDT)

Links

  1. My User Page
  2. List of Assignments
  3. List of Journal Entries
  4. List of Shared Journal Entries

Hayden Hinsch's Answers

  1. I did not know about this case of research fraud before the viewing of this video.
  2. I was pretty dissapointed that one, this would happen at such a prestigious university and two, that it didn't surprise me that a research fraud like this would happen.
  3. Data sharing played the ultimate role in uncovering this fraud. If the data was not shared, the other doctors would not have been able to find the discrepancies in the findings.
  4. I would like to know about the consequences of this fraud. What has happened to Duke, and to Dr. Potti? I know he is still practicing, but why haven't his credentials been stripped? I would also like to know what consequences this has had on the area of cancer research as a whole.

Hhinsch (talk) 22:46, 9 October 2017 (PDT)

Assignments

Week 1
Week 2
Week 3
Week 4
Week 5
Week 6
Week 7
Week 8
Week 9
Week 10
Week 11
Week 12
Week 14
Week 15

Hayden's Individual Journal Entries

hhinsch Week 1
hhinsch Week 2
hhinsch Week 3
hhinsch Week 4
hhinsch Week 5
hhinsch Week 6
hhinsch Week 7
hhinsch Week 8
hhinsch Week 9
hhinsch Week 10
hhinsch Week 11
hhinsch Week 12
hhinsch Week 14
hhinsch Week 15
Page Desiigner Deliverables Page

Class Journal Entries

Class Journal Week 1
Class Journal Week 2
Class Journal Week 3
Class Journal Week 4
Class Journal Week 5
Class Journal Week 6
Class Journal Week 7
Class Journal Week 8
Class Journal Week 9
Class Journal Week 10
Page Desiigner

Electronic Notebook

Hhinsch Electronic Notebook

Hayden's User Page

Hayden Hinsch

Simon Wroblewski's Responses

  1. I was not at all aware of this case research fraud before viewing the video.
  2. I was both shocked and disappointed in Duke University's lacks of ethics and care for their community. It is an inexcusable behavior by Dr. Anil Potti to put his reputation as a scientist before the lives of his patients.
  3. Data sharing played a key role in discovering the data manipulation that Dr. Anil Potti performed. Which ultimately led to the manipulation of his patients trust.
  4. I'd like to know more about the organizations that reviewed his data before publication in order to understand the oversight that occurred. I'd also like to know what Dr. Potti believed he would achieve after frauding his data.

Simonwro120 (talk) 22:56, 9 October 2017 (PDT)

List of Assignments

Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Week 5 Week 6 Week 7 Week 8 Week 9 Week 10 Week 11 Week 12 Week 13 Week 14 Week 15

List of Journal Entries

Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Week 5 Week 6 Week 7 Week 8 Week 9 Week 10 Week 11 Week 12 Week 13 Week 14 Week 15

List of Shared Journals

Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Week 5 Week 6 Week 7 Week 8 Week 9 Week 10 Week 11 Week 12 Week 13 Week 14 Week 15

Dina Bashoura's Responses

  1. No, I was unaware of this case of fraud before viewing the video.
  2. I was disappointed that Potti turned to manipulating the data just to publish his work and that he would potentially be giving the patients the wrong medication that would be doing the opposite of what they saw him for. That saddens me because the man and his wife really believed that his treatment would work and developed such hope for recovery.
  3. Data sharing was the main reason that Potti's fraud was discovered. It was that shared data that led to the discovery of the manipulated data that Potti had done.
  4. I would like to know if Dr. Nevans actually was unaware of the fraud Dr. Potti had committed. I ask this because Dr. Nevans was Potti's mentor so Dr. Nevans must have been aware of the work he was doing and the data he was collecting. Dr. Nevans mentions that he wanted to believe the data was correct for the sake of the cancer community and the potential that it had, which makes me skeptical.

Dbashour (talk) 23:56, 9 October 2017 (PDT)

Dina Bashoura

Biological Databases Homepage

List of Assignments

List of Individual Journal Entries

List of Shared Journal Entries

List of Final Assignments

List of Team Journal Assignments

Retrieved from "https://xmlpipedb.lmucs.io/biodb/fall2017/index.php?title=Class_Journal_Week_6&oldid=2763"