Difference between revisions of "Class Journal Week 6"

From LMU BioDB 2017
Jump to: navigation, search
(added responses, signed, and links)
(Added my responses for week 6 (John Lopez))
Line 39: Line 39:
  
 
{{Template:Aporras1Links}}
 
{{Template:Aporras1Links}}
 +
 +
==John Lopez's Responses==
 +
 +
# 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.
 +
# 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.
 +
# 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.
 +
# 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.
 +
 +
[[User:Johnllopez616|Johnllopez616]] ([[User talk:Johnllopez616|talk]]) 16:15, 9 October 2017 (PDT)
 +
{{Template:johnllopez616}}

Revision as of 23:15, 9 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


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

  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

Retrieved from "https://xmlpipedb.lmucs.io/biodb/fall2017/index.php?title=Class_Journal_Week_6&oldid=2568"