Difference between revisions of "Class Journal Week 6"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Formatting) |
(Finished questions 3 and 4) |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
#*A. I was honestly disgusted to hear about this case. Knowing that multiple people unnecessarily lost their lives while trusting in a fraudulent promise was heartbreaking and upsetting to hear about, especially since the doctor who created this research scandal went relatively unscathed in terms of punishment (legally). On top of that, he is still able to work as a doctor is some fashion, which is pretty disgusting to think about. | #*A. I was honestly disgusted to hear about this case. Knowing that multiple people unnecessarily lost their lives while trusting in a fraudulent promise was heartbreaking and upsetting to hear about, especially since the doctor who created this research scandal went relatively unscathed in terms of punishment (legally). On top of that, he is still able to work as a doctor is some fashion, which is pretty disgusting to think about. | ||
# What role did data sharing play in uncovering this fraud? | # What role did data sharing play in uncovering this fraud? | ||
| + | #*A. The sharing of the data on the research experiment allowed for Paul Goldberg and his anonymous tip to uncover the lies that Dr. Potti created pertaining to his Rhodes scholarship. This lie caused for a deeper re-investigation into Potti's research by the labs of Duke University, thus allowing them to find the glaring mistakes/inconsistencies in Potti's research and results. | ||
# What additional information would you like to know about this case? (We will be visiting it again in subsequent weeks in the course.) | # What additional information would you like to know about this case? (We will be visiting it again in subsequent weeks in the course.) | ||
* Please feel free to respond or comment on your classmates' reflections. | * Please feel free to respond or comment on your classmates' reflections. | ||
| + | [[User:Jnimmers|Jnimmers]] ([[User talk:Jnimmers|talk]]) 16:36, 6 October 2019 (PDT) | ||
Revision as of 15:36, 6 October 2019
John Nimmers-Minor's Responses
Biological Databases
Jnimmers
Assignment Table
- Were you aware of this case of research fraud before viewing this video?
- A. Before watching this video, I had never heard of this case of research fraud.
- What are your initial reactions to hearing about this case?
- A. I was honestly disgusted to hear about this case. Knowing that multiple people unnecessarily lost their lives while trusting in a fraudulent promise was heartbreaking and upsetting to hear about, especially since the doctor who created this research scandal went relatively unscathed in terms of punishment (legally). On top of that, he is still able to work as a doctor is some fashion, which is pretty disgusting to think about.
- What role did data sharing play in uncovering this fraud?
- A. The sharing of the data on the research experiment allowed for Paul Goldberg and his anonymous tip to uncover the lies that Dr. Potti created pertaining to his Rhodes scholarship. This lie caused for a deeper re-investigation into Potti's research by the labs of Duke University, thus allowing them to find the glaring mistakes/inconsistencies in Potti's research and results.
- What additional information would you like to know about this case? (We will be visiting it again in subsequent weeks in the course.)
- Please feel free to respond or comment on your classmates' reflections.
