Paper Example on Duke College Guilty of Fraudulent Research for Grants

Introduction

Duke College not only depended on allocated money for their research but also on grants from other institutions. Such included the national institute of health that offered grants based on a research project's potential for medical good. Duke College was found guilty for submitting incorrect or bogus data so as to wing grants issued for federal research. It was brought out that Pott-Kant embezzled money to buy clothes and other pedestrian items. Researchers have been pressured tremendously to publish data or else perish. This made Potts-Kant to falsify experimental results to make the PI happy and that such data could be impressive and likely to be considered for funding. Falsifying data is evident when Kant uses larger machines to conduct her research that gives data that is alarming.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

How was the fraud suspected? By whom? What was the reaction of the PI to the complaints?

Integrity levels varied from each of the lab researchers and assistants. It is noted that Thomas, who was just out of graduate school with degrees from two Pennsylvania colleges, became certain that Potts Kant was doctoring data from her tiny subjects. Thomas had noted that researchers at Duke Collage fudged data so as to win the lucrative grants for research given by the Environmental Protection Agency and the National Institutes of Health. Mathew G.T, an attorney for the Middle District of North Carolina, defends Duke that the institution was not aware of the falsification. Thomas, the whistleblower, filed a lawsuit against Duke under the Federal False Claims Act. During laboratory exercises, Thomas would see Kant use machines not recommended for specific researches. The data obtained from her research were suspicious as they could not be obtained by other researches in the same research environment.

What went wrong in the laboratory? There have been numerous opportunities to stop it, but so many things went wrong. What happened to the whistleblower?

In the laboratory, there was a great violation of the False Claims Act, specifically in the pulmonary division, and those in supervision, including Potts-Kant, persistently ignored all signs of misconduct and fraud in the laboratory. Information suggested that Thomas, the whistleblower, was awarded $ 33.7 million. This was shielded from the public view. He decides to leave Duke in 2014 over the claim that he had no choice and that he was evading the poisonous working environment. Joe Thomas also left Duke because he was worried that his continued presence would jeopardize the investigation process. At one point in the lab, Thomas saw that Potts-Kant came up with results that were much faster than he or other technicians that even made them not duplicate her results upon their trials. At such a scene, Thomas would have immediately reported Kant.

What is the role of the PI in the lab? Did he bear responsibility for the wrongdoing of his staff member?

A principal investigator (PI) is usually the holder of an independent grant and the lead researcher for the grant project. He or she is assisted by a co-investigator (Co-I) in managing and leading the project. A PI in the lab should not only identify hazardous conditions or operations in the lab but also identify any mischievous activities related to fraud by any of the laboratory workers. The PI is responsible for the wrongdoing of his staff member because he failed to notice or handle the acts or habits of misconduct portrayed by Potts-Kant and other laboratory workers. Kant's act of fraud would have been noticed if her work had been closely checked.