*This is an archive page. The links are no longer being updated. 
1993.11.12 :  End of Dr. Robert C. Gallo Inquiry

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Contact: Dr. Lyle Bivens, NIH 
Friday, Nov. 12, 1993  
(301) 443-3400

The Office of Research Integrity (ORI) announced today that it is
withdrawing its Dec. 29, 1992, legal determination that Dr. Robert
C. Gallo had committed scientific misconduct.

ORI is taking this action in light of recent Research Integrity
Adjudications Panel decisions, including the related Popovic
decision issued on the eve of the Gallo hearing.  These decisions
established a new definition of scientific misconduct as well as a
new and extremely difficult standard for proving misconduct.
The effect of this action is to end an appeal brought by Dr. Gallo
and now pending before the panel.

"ORI found that Dr. Gallo misstated the role that the French virus,
LAV, played in his work with the AIDS virus.  We also found that he
failed to identify, in a timely manner, the origin of the cell line
used to propagate the virus and that he inappropriately restricted
access to the cell line," said Dr. Lyle W. Bivens, director of the
office of Research Integrity.

"After analyzing the panel's Nov. 3 decision, however, it is clear
that the panel now applies different standards from those applied
by ORI to review findings of 'scientific misconduct,'" Bivens
continued.

"The scientific community has a low threshold of tolerance for
false statements, and this view is reflected in the regulatory
definition of 'scientific misconduct.' ORI maintains that the 
standards applied by the panel reflect a fundamental disagreement
with ORI as to the importance of clarity, accuracy and honesty in
science.  However, because ORI is bound by the panel's decisions,
it will not continue its proceeding against Dr. Gallo.  As a
practical matter, the panel's recent decisions have made it
extraordinarily difficult for ORI to defend its legal determination
of scientific misconduct regarding Dr. Gallo."

Under the regulatory definition, scientific misconduct includes
"fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, or other practices that
seriously deviate from those that are commonly accepted in the
scientific community for proposing, conducting, or reporting
research.  It does not include honest error or honest differences
in interpretations or judgments of data."

In its Popovic decision and others, the panel announced its
standard for finding misconduct based on false statements.  The
panel ruled that ORI must prove deliberate intent to deceive, that
a false statement have a material or significant effect on the
research conclusions of the paper, and that there be no possibility
of honest error.

"Although ORI is not proceeding with the Gallo case, it remains
committed to applying the scientific community's standards for
integrity, and will vigorously investigate allegations of
scientific misconduct," Dr. Bivens said.

Dr. Bivens also noted that HHS is moving quickly to implement new
statutory mandates in the misconduct area.  These mandates include
establishing a Commission on Research Integrity to enhance ORI's
ability to address wrongdoing by scientists.

In commenting on the panel's recent decisions, Dr. Bivens stated:
"We believe that ORI's approach to determining scientific
misconduct is the correct course of action.  We are confident that
the new Commission will reinvigorate our efforts to maintain the
highest scientific standards and to deal effectively with
misconduct.  While dismayed by the panel pronouncements, we remain
committed to protecting the integrity of Public Health Service
research."

The Research Integrity Adjudications Panel has interim
responsibility for hearing appeals in scientific misconduct cases.