Korean stem cell debacle

In December 2005, a series of startling revelations about the fabricating of research results by internationally-acclaimed South Korean scientist Hwang Woo Suk, plunged the scientific community and South Korea into shock. His research paper that was published in the prestigious Science magazine, claimed that he was able to produce patient-specific embryonic stem cell lines that would provide potential cures for currently incurable diseases like cancer. The publication propelled him to instant international fame and he was regarded as a national hero of South Korea, being termed as 'supreme scientist' and the 'pride of Korea'. However, with these revelations, serious repercussions have followed.

The image of South Korea as a leader in scientific stem cell research has been tarnished and South Korean scientists are now regarded with suspicion in the scientific community. Credibility of the South Korean goverment's science programmes will be seriously questioned. Moreover, the national image of South Korea is also affected as it had hailed an undeserving person as a national hero. This is representative of the lack of discern of the Korean government. The entire debacle also throws South Korean's 'hurry-up culture' into the limelight. Desire for instant results and fame could have prompted Prof Hwang to falsify research. This whole incident is a also a sharp setback for therapeutic cloning, meaning that the entire process of finding cures for incurable diseases is going to take even longer.

The wider issue at hand is to examine the causes for this incident and the probability of it happening in Singapore.

Firstly, research fraud could occur due to the fervent drive to be No. 1. In the highly competitive world where scientists worldwide are working feverishly to come up with a groundbreaking research, the drive to succeed and attain international fame may sometimes trump scientific integrity.

Social culture is also an important issue. In South Korea, there is unquestioned adherence to authority. In the 7 Jan 2006 article "S. Korean graduate students just can't say no", it states that "Blindly obeying lordly professors is seen as the surest way to success" and that Mr Kim Sun Jong, a former researcher at prof Hwang's lab revealed that he obeyed the professor's order to fabricate data for a paper on the designer stem cells published in Science in May 2005. The general culture is that challenging bosses is uncommon and failing to bow to superiors invites reproach. Such a culture of "obedience" is definitely not the way to encourage the healthy social growth of society. In this case, society is becoming increasingly 'closed'. Unwillingness to challenge authority would eventually lead to a stifling of ideas and the prevalence of unwelcome practices by unreasonable bosses.

Research fraud could also occur due to economic gains. Fabricating results to get increased government grants could be a lucrative way to boost one's income as well. Prof Hwang received US$65 million in grants. There were previous cases of research fraud as well. In 2005, nutrition researcher, Eric Poehlman, formerly of the University of Vermont College of Medicine, pleaded guilty to fraud in obtaining a federal grant for US$542,000. He made up research between 1992 and 2000 to win millions of dollars in federal grant money for studies in such areas as menopause, ageing and hormone supplements.

To liken the situation of the stem-cell debacle to the NKF saga, we can find some similarities. Through the misuse of public trust, clever politics, and deliberate misinformation, these 2 incidents were allowed to take place and to "create a "perfect storm" able to wreck any external oversight system imposed". (Dec 30:Korean stem cell debacle, can it happen in Singapore?) This might not happen in Singapore. Some reasons are that the Singapore government had already published guidelines in 2002 on the regulation of stem cell research, reproductive and therapeutic cloning. Reproductive cloning is banned, and paying for donors is strictly prohibited, while this was only banned in 2004 in South Korea. The prefixed set of stringent guidelines would be an efficient curb to research fraud. Secondly, A*Star, the major funding agency for biomedical reserach today, has strict systems for the monitoring of grant moneys as such, the likelihood of misuse of grants is quite low. At the moment, Singapore is also aiming to develop a culture of scientific integritiy in its next generation of scientists. Singapore also uses foreign scientists extensively and thus the issue of fierce national pride as in South Korea, is probably not a problem here.

Both the NKF saga and the Korean stem cell debacle were busted by whistle-blowers. This shows that individuals can make significant contributions to society as well and that their power should not be underestimated. However, there are currently no laws to protect whistle-blowers. How are we going to ensure that more of such undesirable incidents are revealed if the message we send to whistle-blowers is that they would face serious repercussions? In my opinion, protection laws for these group of people should be put in place, to encourage them to reveal unfair practices, and to keep a stronger surveillance over their superiors and organisations. Regulation by government agencies is insufficient, we need the cooperation of the masses to act as eyes and ears of the government as well. Only then, can we be assured that organisations and individuals likewise would do their utmost best to uphold the integrity of their occupations, be it in the field of science and technology or otherwise.