I assume you heard of Paolo Macchiarini, the “star surgeon” who, with the willpower of a general, simply would win a great battle at the frontline of research – by creating new tracheae using the patients’ own stem cells. That the endeavor had costs in terms of a few soldiers’ or patients’ lives is sad, but some losses must be accepted if one is to win a major battle in the service of cutting-edge experimental research.
It is difficult to avoid such an interpretation of Macchiarini’s mindset, after seeing the Swedish TV-documentaries about him (“Experimenten”/”The Experiments”). You feel the presence of a dominating iron will to carry out a plan and to win. It feeds a warlike spirit in which collegial doubts must be suppressed because they corrupt the morale and slow down the march forward, toward the frontline.
Truth is, as we know, the first casualty of war. Losses must be described as successes, in order not to lose readiness for action in the final battle – which, of course, will be won, don’t for a moment doubt that! The condition of patients who after surgery barely can breathe must thus be described as if the surgery had given them a nearly normal respiratory function. Macchiarini’s misconduct follows the logic of war.
Imagine this rigid winner, waiting impatiently for patients for whom his unproven methods (with some good will) could be interpreted as a last chance to survive. Does he approach the patients as a doctor who wants to offer a last treatment option? Hardly, but the possibility of interpreting the situation in such a way takes him to the frontline: he gets the opportunity to operate on them.
Does he then relate to the patients as a researcher to his participants? Not that either. For the treatment is only improvised in the heat of battle and can hardly even be called experimental; and all failures will be covered up by more scientific fraudulence.
The fact that research ethics developed in the shadow of the Second World War is hardly a coincidence. Something that worries in the Macchiarini case is that research itself – with its competition for funding and more – obviously can be animated by a warlike and strategic spirit of winning, which corrupts individuals as well as institutions…
It goes without saying that suspected research misconduct should not be investigated by the universities themselves; that there is a need for an independent body that handles such matters.
https://lenta.ru/comments/articles/2016/02/11/macchiarini/
Macchiairni published yesterday long interview in Russian media. He describes all story as unfair attacks, accuses authors of SVT film of manipulation of data, KI for not assembling proper committy to approve his operations, claims that synthetic traheas were tested on animals in “hundreds” of publications. He shows no regrets, admits no mistakes and like you wrote, just calling for new battles. For him it is war which must be won. All victims justified by final victory as it reads there. He is also clearly going to continue with this approach until stopped. Unfortunately, Russian media do not report on his misconduct properly.
It does not mean Macchiarini is not aware of ethics rules. He actually CO-AUTHORED paper on research ethics:
http://www.regmedgrant.com/files/Features_of_ethical_expertise.pdf
Very peculiar article if one compares this text with his practical actions.
Thanks a lot for commenting and for providing this information!