Abstract
The authors present and discuss cases of academic medicine failing to address unethical behaviour in academic science and, thereby, illustrate the scope and seriousness of the problem. The Olivieri/Apotex affair is just another instance of academic medicine's dereliction in a case of scientific fraud and misconduct. Instead of vigorously supporting their faculty member in her efforts to honestly communicate her findings and to protect patients from the risks associated with the use of the study drug, the University of Toronto collaborated with the Apotex company's "stalling tactics," closed down Dr Olivieri's laboratory, harassed her, and ultimately dismissed her.
The authors argue that the incentives for addressing problematic behaviour have to be revised in order to effect a change in the current pattern of response that occurs in academic medicine. An externally imposed realignment of incentives could convert the perception of the whistleblower, from their present caste as the enemy within, into a new position, as valued friend of the institution. The authors explain how such a correction could encourage appropriate reactions to scientific misconduct from academic medicine.
Full Text
The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (145.4 KB).
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Anderson C. The aftermath of the Gallo case. Science. 1994 Jan 7;263(5143):20–22. doi: 10.1126/science.8272861. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Beardsley T. Profile: David Baltimore. A troubled homecoming. Sci Am. 1992 Jan;266(1):33–36. doi: 10.1038/scientificamerican0192-33. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Dalton R. As US reviewer resigns over slur. Nature. 1995 Jun 15;375(6532):529–529. doi: 10.1038/375529b0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Ernhart Claire B., Scarr Sandra, Geneson David F. On being a whistleblower: the Needleman case. Ethics Behav. 1993;3(1):73–93. doi: 10.1207/s15327019eb0301_2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Frader J. E. Political and interpersonal aspects of ethics consultation. Theor Med. 1992 Mar;13(1):31–44. doi: 10.1007/BF00489218. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Lubalin James S., Matheson Jennifer L. The fallout: what happens to whistleblowers and those accused but exonerated of scientific misconduct? Sci Eng Ethics. 1999 Apr;5(2):229–250. doi: 10.1007/s11948-999-0014-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Poon P. Legal protections for the scientific misconduct whistleblower. J Law Med Ethics. 1995 Spring;23(1):88–94. doi: 10.1111/j.1748-720x.1995.tb01336.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Rhodes R., Strain J. J. Trust and transforming medical institutions. Camb Q Healthc Ethics. 2000 Spring;9(2):205–217. doi: 10.1017/s096318010090207x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Sherman S. E. The False Claims Act. Litigating scientific misconduct. Public Health Rep. 1995 Nov-Dec;110(6):784–789. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Sprague Robert L. Whistleblowing: a very unpleasant avocation. Ethics Behav. 1993;3(1):103–133. doi: 10.1207/s15327019eb0301_4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Taubes G. Plagiarism suit wins; experts hope it won't set a trend. Science. 1995 May 26;268(5214):1125–1125. doi: 10.1126/science.7794410. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Zylke J. W. Investigation results in disciplinary action against researchers, retraction of articles. JAMA. 1989 Oct 13;262(14):1910-1, 1915. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]