Think about it the University of Washington spent 16 months pouring through this guys info. for his 8yrs of work and UW did have not one paper retracted and not one grant was given back? Why? Read Research Misconduct at the ORI.hhs.gov site. Institutions are supposed to spend 60 days for inquiry and 120 to investigate NOT 16 MONTHS.

How many people worked in the lab? Answer: A lot. For years the UW never provided proper storage space or good computers for research. I saw research slides stuffed under lab tech work benches and in the cleaning closets. 3 independent labs work in a small space with no IT person to help. They all (lab people) worked to fix stuff when computers crashed or did not have enough storage on computers.

Check out the “investigators” they were anybody Karin Nyrop could get to tell the UW’s story. Find out there names. The Ligget investigator guy (check his background)…he always had a personal beef. He enjoyed participating in the railroad job and the Times gave him even more glory by printing his words.

If anybody is outright guilty of misconduct it is the University of Washington. The put Elizabeth Loftus through the same process and took 21 Months. She stayed and fought the battle till the end and even though the UW gave in and stated no misconduct the damage was done she had to leave and start over in So. Calif.

ORI Misconduct Cases Highest Since 1996;
Office Speeding Case Closures, Official Says

John E. Dahlberg, director of the division of investigative oversight at ORI, confirmed the statistics and told BNA March 13 that since taking over the division last May, he and his staff have tried to channel more of their focus on bringing cases to closure, while at the same time working more aggressively with ORI attorneys to get the misconduct cases handled.

ORI opened 230 cases last year, which Dahlberg said is consistent with the case load of previous years. However, he said ORI sees a “very small tip of the iceberg” in terms of the actual research misconduct that is happening, which he described as “reasonably widespread.” He cited estimates from scientific journals that indicate about 1 percent of all their accepted manuscripts apparently have fraudulent figures.

“If you do any kind of extrapolation, that could translate into lots and lots of cases,” Dahlberg said.