Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Prime Human Cloning Researcher Humiliated

Posted by Zonk on from the political-setback dept.

Starker_Kull writes "Today, the first scientist to clone human egg cells, Dr. Hwang Woo-suk, was forced to resign from his post for 'breaches of ethics'. It appears that the ethical breaches consisted of overzealous assistants who volunteered their own eggs for use. After Dr. Hwang declined the offer, the assistants secretly donated their eggs under false names. After Dr. Hwang discovered the deception, he tried to cover it up to protect his researchers - but the news eventually leaked out."

4 of 252 comments (clear)

  1. Resigned? by Darlantan · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I really fail to see how this is something worth resigning over. So, his assistants were a bit overzealous, and he didn't know about it until it was too late. Yes, he tried to cover it up, but did he try to fudge any of the research? Does this make his science bad in any way? Seems pretty silly to me.

    --
    Fill in your four or five-letter word of wisdom here _ _ _ _ _.
  2. Re:Maybe I'm confused ... by elgatozorbas · · Score: 4, Interesting
    But what exactly was unethical about lab workers also being donors in the first place?

    The line between voluntary and reluctant donation is very vague because it can be assumed that lab workers can easily be put under pressure to donate their eggs. Afterwards it is hard to prove that they did it (in)voluntarily. To avoid this discussion their genetic material should not be used alltogether.

  3. One thing still needs to be cleared up by TVmisGuided · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'm puzzled over something. How, exactly, does a woman donate an egg without anyone else knowing about it?


    Sperm donations are easy to figure out (I'll leave the visuals to the reader's deranged imagination). But women? Unless I'm sorely mistaken, the extraction of a viable egg is a surgical procedure, and no matter how good Waldos have gotten over the years, I haven't heard of one sophisticated enough yet to allow a woman to perform that procedure on herself. So the question is, who performed the procedure, and who assisted?


    "Three can keep a secret if two are dead." So goes the cliche. It's been proven accurate with this minor scandal. Unfortunately for the researcher, the gory details got out before he was able to either bring them forward himself or develop a solid-enough cover. But rather than looking to the surreptitious donors, I'd be looking for whoever did the egg extractions, and asking why they outed the mess. No publication credit? Money? Personality clash? Something I haven't thought of?


    We now return to our regularly-scheduled slashdotting intellectual discussion, already in progress...

    --
    All the world's an analog stage, and digital circuits play only bit parts.
  4. Re:Maybe I'm confused ... by rxmd · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Whoah! That would rule out just about any scientist. Or anybody else doing any kind of work they care about.
    I guess there's still a difference between a scientist doing research that he cares about (most of us do) and a biologist working with a cell culture that is technically his or her daughter.
    --
    As a state gets corrupt, its laws multiply; the most corrupt states have the most numerous laws. (Tacitus, Annales 3:27)