Cloning for Stem Cells: Controversy, Again
Posted by Jessica Cussins May 30, 2013
Biopolitical Times
Cloning and controversy seem to go well together. The recent news that Oregon researchers have created human stem cell lines through cloning was thrown into doubt after an anonymous submission on PubPeer reported several errors in their paper. It notes that two different images are slightly cropped and duplicated throughout the paper although all four instances are supposed to show different phenomena. Additionally, it calls attention to two scatterplots that are identical and two more that are almost identical. Are these just sloppy mistakes?
Shoukhrat Mitalipov, who leads the research team, immediately replied that the errors were simply careless slip-ups made in a rush to publish, and that they do not impact the validity of the results: “The results are real, the cell lines are real, everything is real.”
Cell, the journal that published the paper, backed him up, calling them “minor errors.” But the editors clearly should have caught them. This is particularly the case because of the notorious fraud by Korean scientist Hwang Woo-suk, whose claims about having successfully created stem cells from cloned human embryos were first cast into doubt by the realization that they included duplicated and manipulated images. As Paul Knoepfler noted,
The authors are now in the process of fixing the errors, and giving other researchers access to their cell lines so that they can replicate their results. Presumably, confirmation from these researchers will come shortly. What will be missing, however, is a response to the objections about cloning techniques that have nothing to do with careless errors.
David King, director of UK watchdog group Human Genetics Alert, wrote a scathing article for CNN disparaging Mitalipov’s research for being irresponsible “zombie science.” He noted that people have incredibly high hopes for the possibilities of therapeutic cloning due to inordinate amounts of hype over many years, but that there’s little scientific substance or logic to back up the claims.
In another telling debate on Al Jazeera, King and two other commentators, including a stem cell scientist who previously supported research cloning, found themselves in agreement: Given that there are less controversial ways already available to produce disease-specific and patient-specific stem cells, Mitalipov’s cloning technique is unnecessary.
Perhaps the errors in the Cell paper are just a useful reminder that there is better work out there.
Previously on Biopolitical Times:
Shoukhrat Mitalipov, who leads the research team, immediately replied that the errors were simply careless slip-ups made in a rush to publish, and that they do not impact the validity of the results: “The results are real, the cell lines are real, everything is real.”
Cell, the journal that published the paper, backed him up, calling them “minor errors.” But the editors clearly should have caught them. This is particularly the case because of the notorious fraud by Korean scientist Hwang Woo-suk, whose claims about having successfully created stem cells from cloned human embryos were first cast into doubt by the realization that they included duplicated and manipulated images. As Paul Knoepfler noted,
Given the 2004/2005 cloning papers by Hwang Woo-suk that proved to be bogus and the highly sensitive nature of human therapeutic cloning, an intense review of the paper before publication would indeed seem like it should have been a no-brainer, eh?Former Nature senior editor Natalie DeWitt commented that all this “unnecessary turmoil” could (and should) have been avoided. “I and my Nature editorial colleagues recommended that for critical cloning papers, since it’s so easy to verify, they should submit verification from a separate lab when they submit the paper.”
The authors are now in the process of fixing the errors, and giving other researchers access to their cell lines so that they can replicate their results. Presumably, confirmation from these researchers will come shortly. What will be missing, however, is a response to the objections about cloning techniques that have nothing to do with careless errors.
David King, director of UK watchdog group Human Genetics Alert, wrote a scathing article for CNN disparaging Mitalipov’s research for being irresponsible “zombie science.” He noted that people have incredibly high hopes for the possibilities of therapeutic cloning due to inordinate amounts of hype over many years, but that there’s little scientific substance or logic to back up the claims.
We are told that there will be great medical benefits and that the risks that there will be cloned babies are small, but in truth it's the other way round… What the Oregon scientists have done is to deliver the baby that the would-be human cloners have been waiting for 15 years – what looks like a reliable technique for creating cloned embryos. I think it was irresponsible to publish their research before there is a comprehensive global ban on cloning, with tough sanctions.The current controversy makes it very clear: It really is time for the United States to join every other developed nation and ban human cloning. Marcy Darnovsky of CGS explains this need in a recent televised debate for CCTV.
In another telling debate on Al Jazeera, King and two other commentators, including a stem cell scientist who previously supported research cloning, found themselves in agreement: Given that there are less controversial ways already available to produce disease-specific and patient-specific stem cells, Mitalipov’s cloning technique is unnecessary.
Perhaps the errors in the Cell paper are just a useful reminder that there is better work out there.
Previously on Biopolitical Times: