If there’s one thing UD‘s learned from following the history of retracted papers – most of them, lately, hothothot stem cell papers – is that you don’t want to go half way. You don’t get to be “the principal investigator on grants totaling $57 million since 2000″ without going for it, attracting BIG attention onaccounta your amazing, but strikingly difficult to replicate, work on regenerating dying hearts.

UD has also learned that with the imprimatur of Harvard behind you (our old friend Joseph Biederman continues, in his curious research, to benefit from the association, as does the scientist at issue here, Piero Anversa, the scrambled letters of whose name, UD feels sure, add up to some great phrases, but she’s not up to the task right now), you can just keep rolling along and pulling it in (all those millions for Biederman and Anversa are of course your taxes). People have been making a fuss (a negative fuss) about Anversa’s work for more than ten years.

One Harvard researcher who has long been familiar with Anversa’s work said that many people at Harvard are not surprised by these developments. “If anything it’s surprising how long it’s taken for these questions to surface.”

It’s kind of a funny way to live, isn’t it? You watch a way-belaureled scientist do his questionable research year after year… Many of you watch…

Trackback URL for this post:

6 Responses to “Faint Heart Never Won Full Funding”

  1. TAFKAU Says:

    Best I could come up with was “a peon arrives”.

  2. Margaret Soltan Says:

    TAFKAU: Excellent. Here’s mine:

    A raver opines.

  3. adam Says:

    Or we could say he’s “a no-sap riever.”

  4. Margaret Soltan Says:

    Nice one, adam. And, as a thank you, here’s another:

    Rape aversion.

  5. Dr_Doctorstein Says:

    Piero Anversa? O, a perv is near.

  6. Margaret Soltan Says:

    Wow, good one, Dr_Doctorstein.

    Here’s yet another:

    Rave on! Praise!

Comment on this Entry

Latest UD posts at IHE