A University of Montreal researcher was just sentenced for falsifying work in an effort to be awarded federal grants. From our ethics course, we have learned that what this man, Eric Poehlman, has done is unethical. The interesting part of this case is that is marks the first time in the USA that a researcher would serve time in prison for falsifying data to obtain federal grants.

Dr. Poehlman is a specialist in exercise physiology whose work on menopause, aging, hormone replacement, obesity, and Alzheimer's was all manipulated (changed and forged) in an effort to receive federal funding. Dr. Poehlman explained that his actions were a direct result of "pressure to win federal grants, saying the number of grants a researcher received 'determined your academic wealth'". Just as the level of a salesman is determined by how much he sells, the status of a research scientist is determined in part by the type and number of grants they have been awarded.

We certainly know that Dr. Poehlman is not the first US scientist to falsify data but his actions come at a time when people are taking this kind of misconduct very seriously. The first researcher charged with a federal crime for falsifying results to get a federal grant was a Professor at the University of Pittsburgh, who was subsequently convicted in 1988 but escaped jail time.

Poehlam falsified data over the course of his career and used those preliminary findings in applications for 17 grants with funding more than $11 million. Thankfully many of the applications were denied, but a few were accepted and they totaled $2.9 million. As a result of defrauding the federal government, the court has permanently barred Poehlman from getting more federal research grants, and was ordered to write letters of retraction and correction to several scientific journals, in addition to jail time.

The issue at hand here is, even if the research ultimately led to a greater good, the damage he has caused by falsifying data may lead to further setbacks in the field as well as losing the respect of the public who entrusts Scientists with their tax-money. We can be thankful that Dr. Poehlman's deceptions, however small they might be, were caught and can now be corrected. Often deceptions such as these can lead an entire field down the wrong path for decades and compromise the work of other un-affiliated scientists.

For more information on this case, you can read the original article published by the Boston Globe.

The real question is: How often do scientists under academic or other pressures (personal gain, etc.) feel it is justified to falsify (change AND create) data?

My answer: More often than we think.