Anderson, Christopher. "A Final Frenzy for Landmark Cases," Nature 355 (2 January 1992), pp.
Elsewhere in this file is the smaller, boxed item for this article which is, essentially, a January
document: a retrospective and an augury concerning important cases of scientific misconduct.
The principals mentioned here are: Imanishi-Kari, Robert Gallo and Erdem Cantekin.
The predictions here are that the US attorney in Baltimore may well seek an indictment against
Imanishi-Kari. And the retrospective is that the NIH is backing away from the "leadked"
document in the case. They whole process is at something of a standstill with Imanishi-Kari
requesting documents, the OSI cannot provide them because they are in the hands of the attorney.
Finally, Dingell may hold hearings into the ways in which the university mishandled the hearings
in this case.
Gallo, Nature predicts, will becleared of some charges but will face new ones including his 1987
patent of the AIDS test. The French are urging a reopening of the patent agreement. There are
additional issues: did Gallo know of a study by Donald Francis at the Center for Disease Control
in 1984? If he did, he must have lied in his 1987 patent.
Cantekin's case is reported here as "relevant" to big science. The University of Pittsburgh had
pursued its efforts to strip him of tenure in spite of the fact that he has been cleared by OSI.
Moreover, Cantekin is preparing to take the offensive: he has filed suits against Bluestone and
the hospital in efforts to get possession of the original data on the ear study. He plans to ask the
FDA to withdraw its approval of amoxicillin, a move which would affet a 30,000,000