Fraud, competition, etc

alex taylor ataylor at
Wed Jul 19 11:52:01 EST 1995

In article <Pine.3.89.9507181010.A10797-0100000 at>,
Alexander Berezin <berezin at MCMAIL.CIS.MCMASTER.CA> wrote:
>CLARIFICATION (for those USA colleauges, who may not know):
>Arthurs' report was an inquiry on the fraud allegations of
>his colleaugues by Prof.Valery Fabrikant of Concordia Univ.,
>Montreal who in August 1992 has MURDERED 4 other professors
>in the culmination of "research competition" feods. While
>nobody, of course, justifies Fabrikant's action, the
>Arthurs' report has concluded that much of the Fabrikant's
>allegations (consistently ignored by the administation)
>were, in fact, quite valid.  

	Yes, but more to the point it *took* a lunatic like Fabrikant to
even get the tri-council to notice that there was a problem. Furthermore,
Harry Arthurs expressed surprise that 1) researchers were not shocked by
the truth of the allegations and 2) points out that the Dean (in her
letter appended to the report) confesses that the internal problem-solving
mechanisms were not able to deal with the problem. Arthurs also
articulated the position that the claims made by Fabrikant, in addition
to being substantive , were unlikely to be unique to Concordia. He was of
the opinion (and I fully concur on this point) that the problems they
uncovered were probably common to all the science and enigineering faculty
at most if not all universities.>

 >To what extent this tragedy can be seen as
rooted in the >viciously competitive funding policies remains a matter 
>of opinion.    

	Arthurs concluded that this was a major paert of the problem.
Another problem that he specifically elaborated on was
corporate/university interpenetration.

>Yes, they will be approximately as effective and/or
>meaningful as the "Moral Code of the Builders of the
>Communism" adopted by (whatever # ?) Congress of the
>KPSS (Comm.Party of Sov.Union).
>"TRI-COUNCIL": 3 of Canadian Federal Research funding
>NSERC: Natural Sciences and Engineering (analogue of NSF)
>MRC: Medical Res.Council (analogue of NIH)
>SSHRC: Social Sci. and Humanities (analgue of what ?)
>The policy of tri-council is BASED on a secretive
>"peer review" and the total lack of any serious
>accountability of the system before the members of the
>research community. To claim "research integrity", etc.
>by the system based on a SECRECY is a fundamental 
>logical contradiction of terms, a misnomer. It can't
>deliver what it claims ("excellence", "innovation",
>"risk-taking", etc) EVEN "IN PRINCIPLE", even if the
>Funding Committees will composed solely from
>angels and/or Nobel Prize laureates.
>Alex Berezin

 Alex Taylor
 ataylor at> 

More information about the Bioforum mailing list