Minor Misconduct

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


While its certainly not as sexy of a story as California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s conflict of interest surrounding nutritional supplements, The House Energy and Commerce Committee recently announced that they had been told by the director of the National Institute of Health that investigators recently found 44 scientists who violated the agency’s conflict of interest rules. Nine of the cases have been deemed serious enough to be investigated for criminal wrongdoing.

In June, the prestigious British scientific journal Nature published a study suggesting that close to one-third of American scientists have engaged in “questionable practices.” The most widely engaged in misconduct was the relatively minor offense of inadequate record-keeping. But unsettlingly large numbers of scientists admitted to more serious matters like changing a study because of pressure from a funding source (15.5 percent) or overlooking other studies with weak methodology or data (12.5 percent).

It’s hard to say how serious the NIH violations are, but its good news that the NIH mostly seems concerned with the bookkeeping aspect of it, which doesn’t imply serious breaches on matters of scientific integrity. And the history here should be noted: the 44 cases stemmed from an original 81 that the committee found questionable and asked the NIH to look into. So of the original 81, only 9 warrant external investigation.

Understandably, the committee seems to be wary of giving any ammunition to foes of the NIH—the same press release that announced the findings calls for full congressional reauthorization of the Institute’s budget. It seems that the Committee members just want to be seen as vigilant watchdogs, not as hatchet men.

We've never been very good at being conservative.

And usually, that serves us well in doing the ambitious, hard-hitting journalism that you turn to Mother Jones for. But it also means we can't afford to come up short when it comes to scratching together the funds it takes to keep our team firing on all cylinders, and the truth is, we finished our budgeting cycle on June 30 about $100,000 short of our online goal.

This is no time to come up short. It's time to fight like hell, as our namesake would tell us to do, for a democracy where minority rule cannot impose an extreme agenda, where facts matter, and where accountability has a chance at the polls and in the press. If you value our reporting and you can right now, please help us dig out of the $100,000 hole we're starting our new budgeting cycle in with an always-needed and always-appreciated donation today.

payment methods

We've never been very good at being conservative.

And usually, that serves us well in doing the ambitious, hard-hitting journalism that you turn to Mother Jones for. But it also means we can't afford to come up short when it comes to scratching together the funds it takes to keep our team firing on all cylinders, and the truth is, we finished our budgeting cycle on June 30 about $100,000 short of our online goal.

This is no time to come up short. It's time to fight like hell, as our namesake would tell us to do, for a democracy where minority rule cannot impose an extreme agenda, where facts matter, and where accountability has a chance at the polls and in the press. If you value our reporting and you can right now, please help us dig out of the $100,000 hole we're starting our new budgeting cycle in with an always-needed and always-appreciated donation today.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate