Summary and Comments on the "Scientific Misconduct" charges used to open the witch hunt against Dr. Kay

The scientific misconduct charges brought against Dr. Kay by the UCEC were:

1) Fabricated data in a study involving 19 Alzheimer's patients by using a graph originally plotted (duration of years vs time postmortem) for three patients. These data may have been the basis for a published article(s). 2) Fabricated peripheral blood data for 19 patients when only 12 patients were ever drawn for blood samples. A week later, the inquiry co are the subject of the allegations mentioned in the allegation letter sent to you earlier." The two manuscripts are listed below (1,2). Both are review articles published in special issues of journals where authors were asked to give a perspective, and their view as to where their area of research was going (3,4). A brief look at charge #1 tells you that it is ridiculous. Why would anyone plot "duration of years vs time postmortem"? It doesn't make any sense. Did the Vice President for Research at the UA really think that Dr. Kay was digging up bodies at 1, 2, 3, 4. . .years post death (postmortem) and reburying them to dig them up again the next year? No one would do such an experiment. It is a stupid experiment. To our knowledge, no one has ever done or would ever do such an experihe barrel" to get her. This charge should have immediately been thrown out. It is laughable. Charge #2 is quickly dispensed with. In article 1, it is stated that blood was drawn from 10 patients and 10 controls. A detailed review of the papers in question shows that no claims are made regarding peripheral blood studies on more than that number of patients.

There is, however, one figure referring to19 samples from brains obtained at autopsy by other research groups. The figure legend reads: "Scattergram of binding of monoclonal antibody 1078 binding to the frontal cortex of 19 AD and controls." (AD indicates Alzheimer's disease patients.) Our best guess is that the administ a point of carefully distinguishing between studies on blood and studies on "brain tissue samples". You can see why the inquiry team quite properly exonerated Dr. Kay of the charges of "scientific misconduct." In fact, there is a serious question as to whether an inquiry committee should have been convened at all given the bizarre nature of the allegations. Nonetheless, it is even better for Dr. Kay that she was exonerated of "scientific misconduct" by a full-blown committee investigation even though none was warranted. That should have laid the "scienti through darkness. mmbkay from the "Wilderness" series

Let's keep the light burning and protect science, scientists, eccentrics, and ourselves from witch hunts!!!

Back to main page