The reviews of a STAP paper submitted to and rejected by the journal Science in 2012 were posted at Retraction Watch yesterday. They filled in some gaps in the puzzle of the series of events that led to such flawed science being published in Nature in January 2014, but the reviews also raised more questions. Today, more STAP paper […]
STAP papers blistered by Nature’s own reviewers were then accepted Read More »
Before the two STAP cell papers were published in Nature in January of 2014, much of the same data was reportedly submitted as single papers to other high-profile journals including Science. In these cases, the proto-STAP papers as we might call them were rejected. But why? Until now we largely could only speculate. However, the reviews
Full Reviews of Rejected STAP Paper Point to Early Signs of Big Trouble Read More »
Here is the second installment in my “elephant in the lab” series, which addresses controversial or even taboo topics in laboratories and the sciences. The first segment was on taboo topics in the iPS cell field. People loved the honesty of that post. Today I am talking about how sometimes scientists kill each other’s papers
Dirty dozen easy steps to killing a paper during review: elephant in the lab series Read More »
Remember former Trump’s FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb? Gottlieb’s back in the news in an interesting way related to the upcoming second Trump administration. I just wrote about what to expect from new FDA Commissioner nominee Marty Makary. In that piece, I noted that Scott Gottlieb first came to lead the FDA after a record of
Weekly reads: Scott Gottlieb v. RFK Jr., DNA typewriters, Arnold Caplan Read More »
New research on stem cell patches is exciting. However, more broadly, “stem cell patches” can mean very different things. What I’m talking about here are the types of patches that can repair holes or other problems with tissues. This is a powerful regenerative approach. In contrast, I’m not a fan of the type of stem cell
Weekly reads: stem cell patches, helicase editing, hearing loss, Astellas, Dr. No Read More »
Some of you might remember the stem cell clinic firm R3 Stem Cell. I have major concerns about some of what they are marketing including in the U.S. I was reminded of R3 Stem Cell again just now. The Associated Press (AP) ran a PR on R3 Stem like it was a news story. I
Media like the AP promote unproven stem cell clinics such as R3 Stem Cell Read More »
If you’ve never heard of the KRAS G12C mutation, it’s a particularly frightening mutation present in numerous cancers. Like the MYC oncogene, many people view mutations in RAS as undruggable, but new efforts show some glimmers of hope. The drug Sotorasib has been approved by the FDA to target the KRAS G12C mutation. Here’s a
Weekly reads: KRAS G12C, eLife journal controversy, bird iPSCs Read More »
Stem cell clinic firm US Stem Cell has just had a major paper retracted. Two of the notable authors on that paper are US Stem Cell leader Kristin Comella and stem cell researcher Thomas Ichim, who was senior author. It’s not clear to me if Comella currently has a role in the firm or not.
Stem cell clinic US Stem Cell has key paper retracted Read More »
What’s been going on in the stem cell and regenerative medicine field over the past week and what are some worthwhile things to read? Today’s post has recommended recent reads from the scientific literature and the media. I’ve also got our weekly stem cell/regenerative medicine quiz question and the answer to last week’s. You can
Recommended reads: FDA warning, COVID updates, stem cell pubs Read More »
Amongst all that is bouncing around within the stem cell clinic maelstrom out there, one thing stands out for me as the most troubling. I’m talking about for-profit experimentation on children, such as injection of kids with unproven stem cells for autism or cerebral palsy by unproven clinics. In my opinion it’s almost always going
Journal erred on Panama clinic stem cell for autism paper Read More »