Difference between revisions of "Resource:E1827d9c-7be0-42ca-bf86-ef5003366ebd"
From The Embassy of Good Science
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
|Resource Type=Cases | |Resource Type=Cases | ||
|Title=Court Denies Appeal of HIV Fraudster’s 57-month Prison Sentence | |Title=Court Denies Appeal of HIV Fraudster’s 57-month Prison Sentence | ||
| − | |Is About=This | + | |Is About=This factual case details a court's decision to maintain the prison sentence for a former researcher who was found guilty of scientific misconduct. The misconduct entailed the modification of HIV trial outcomes to make a drug look more effective. The attorney of the defendant appealed the decision, but the court decided to maintain the sentence. |
| + | |Important Because=Scientific misconduct, especially the spiking of research outcomes, in drug trials severely endangers the health of future patients that will be treated with the drug. In addition, it leads to the waste of research funds and diminishes the public trust in science. Therefore, offenses such as these must be punished. | ||
|Important For=Researchers | |Important For=Researchers | ||
}} | }} | ||
| Line 15: | Line 16: | ||
|Has Timepoint=13-1-2016 | |Has Timepoint=13-1-2016 | ||
|Has Location=USA; United States | |Has Location=USA; United States | ||
| − | |Has Virtue And Value=Honesty | + | |Has Virtue And Value=Honesty; Transparency; Accountability |
|Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Fabrication; Faked Data | |Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Fabrication; Faked Data | ||
|Related To Research Area=Biological sciences | |Related To Research Area=Biological sciences | ||
}} | }} | ||
Revision as of 12:54, 12 July 2021
ResourcesCases
Court Denies Appeal of HIV Fraudster’s 57-month Prison Sentence
What is this about?
This factual case details a court's decision to maintain the prison sentence for a former researcher who was found guilty of scientific misconduct. The misconduct entailed the modification of HIV trial outcomes to make a drug look more effective. The attorney of the defendant appealed the decision, but the court decided to maintain the sentence.
Why is this important?
Scientific misconduct, especially the spiking of research outcomes, in drug trials severely endangers the health of future patients that will be treated with the drug. In addition, it leads to the waste of research funds and diminishes the public trust in science. Therefore, offenses such as these must be punished.
