Miscounduct and Grantsmanship

U27111 at uicvm.uic.edu U27111 at uicvm.uic.edu
Sun Dec 24 11:34:42 EST 1995

Remember when I said I would do a cross post over in an AIDS NG on
the topic of Misconduct and Grantsmanship?  Well... originally I
only received a few replies - with one being a not-so-nice
reference as to what we should do to Gallo.

Thus, I just recently posted a summary of the discussion (on this
specific thread) over there.  And here's a reply I got.  I thought
it was an interesting observation from someone not in our field
(but certainly interested in HIV/AIDS).

As usual, I respect the anonymity of personal e-mail and thus will
not list his name or e-mail address:

Kathy --- sorry I didn't respond earlier.  Actually your topic is
very important, and I think Alexander is right about the amount of
misconduct.  What we see and hear about is like the tip of an
iceberg, with the mass laying below the surface.  That is one
reason I reject all the "conspiracy" theories about the "AIDS"
establishment, but believe there is more "monkey" business to big,
bureacratically funded HIV and "AIDS" science than African Green
Monkeys and Baboon Transplants.  There is no conspiracy, just
typical interest group blinders, group think and self-serving
politics complete with sound bites, political correctness and
media manipulation.  It is not hard to believe that "good
intentions" which happen to coincide with self-interest can
overwhelm professional ethics, honesty and objectivity.  Especially
dangerous when you add a bit of the "end justifies the means"

There were so many investigations over the years of Gallo and his
original "HIV is the AIDS virus" team members (including possible
scientific theft, misappropriation of funds, mismanagement, etc.)
according to the many sources I've read.  And the CDC has been
called on the carpet a few times for the questionable (but sure to
secure power, prestige and funding) imminent epidemics of
Legionaires' Disease, Swine Flu, etc.. But, bureaucracies like the
NIH, CDC, FDA and Dept. of Health are extremely resistant to
oversight (in part due to the "mysteries" of science for
laymen).  And since all "good things" such as money, media
material, prestige, peer acceptance, and even peer review and
oversight etc. flow from this government-medical-industrial
symbiote (or parasite dpending on viewpoint), who is in a position
to "gaurd" these self-appointed gaurdians?

The misconduct is well-known among the players (ask the French, ask
Duesberg, ask the NIH investigators opposing Gallo's bid for a new
clinic, ask those of his original team involved in the Pan Data
scandal, or those who put government funds in private bank
accounts) --- but still the band plays on, and on, and on.

More information about the Bioforum mailing list