Anderson, Christopher. "Another Blow for ORI," Science 262 (29 October 1993), p. 343.
ORI has been plagued with problems ever since it established the appeals process by means of
which accused scientists can obtain "...more court-like procedures and rights..." And the appeals
board has been frustrating ORI's cases of misconduct. "Most troubling for ORI is the board's
requirement that investigators prove that false statements were both intended to deceive and
important to the thrust of the research claims."
It would appear that the case against Margit Hamosh has dropped. It is further reported that three
of the five charges against Richard Gallo have been dropped.
"ORI hopes to revolve its problem by changing the PHS definition of misconduct to include
cases where a researcher ‘knew or should have known' the statements were false, a more flexible
intent requirement that ORI believes it can meet more often. But the definition change will
require the approval of a congressionally mandated advisory board - which does not yet exist and
may not be able to act until late next year. In the meantime, ORI officials say they have little
choice but to pick and choose their prosecutions more carefully."