An
official investigation into the disgraced South Korean scientist found
that all his most significant work in human cloning was based on fake
data, casting doubt on the future of the technology in medicine.
Though
the inquiry confirmed Professor Hwang’s claim that Snuppy, an Afghan
hound, was a true clone, it demolished two far more significant papers
that purported to show the first cloned human embryos and stem cells.
As
well as inventing 11 lines of master cells that had supposedly been
cloned from real patients, he fabricated a 2004 study that suggested
that he had created a cloned human embryo and extracted stem cells for
the first time, the inquiry ruled. Both papers had been published in
the respected journal Science.
The findings are a severe
setback for therapeutic cloning, which promises new treatments for
conditions such as diabetes, paralysis and Parkinson’s disease by
providing cells that would not be rejected by patients’ immune systems.
The
disclosure that Dr Hwang’s achievements were nothing but fantasy means
that no stem cells have ever been extracted from cloned human embryos,
and leaves scientists with few clues as to how this might be
accomplished.
Though a British team has also created a cloned
human embryo, Professor Hwang’s group appeared to be doing this much
more efficiently, and was the only one to have produced stem cells as
well.
Stem cell experts, however, pointed out that the medical
promise of the master cells — which can form any type of tissue — does
not necessarily rest on cloning. Stem cells taken from ordinary embryos
also have great potential benefit.
Professor Alison Murdoch, of
the University of Newcastle upon Tyne, who led the British team that
cloned a human embryo last year, said: “It is regrettable that
Professor Hwang’s recent work has been called into question and it is a
major blow that human therapeutic cloning now looks to be much more of
a challenge than his recent reports led us to believe.
“However,
we believe therapeutic cloning promises important scientific
developments which could lead to future treatments for a range of
diseases. We are committed to continuing our research in this area as
part of a broad portfolio of research into stem cell therapeutics.”
Stephen
Minger, a stem cell researcher at King’s College London, said: “All of
us who admired Hwang are deeply saddened by this revelation. However,
it is likely to have a minimal effect on stem cell biology per se
and work in the field will continue. It is also important to remember
that cloning and stem cells are different things, and that stem cell
lines have been, and continue to be, made without using nuclear
transfer [cloning].”
The Seoul National University panel, which
was set up last month to investigate allegations of fraud from two of
Professor Hwang’s former collaborators, found that the scientist “did
not have any proof to show that cloned embryonic stem cells were ever
created”.
It cast doubt on whether the embryos presented in the
2004 work were even cloned, saying the evidence could not rule out the
possibility that they were eggs that developed spontaneously. Dr
Hwang’s later research, however, does appear to have generated cloned
embryos.
Chung Myung Hee, who chaired the inquiry, said:
“Hwang’s team did not have the data for the stem cell lines in the 2004
paper, but fabricated it.” The report accepted that Snuppy was probably
an authentic clone. Preliminary results of DNA tests commissioned by Nature,
the journal that published the research last year, indicate that the
dog appeared to have been cloned, though the work has yet to be peer-
reviewed.
The panel found Dr Hwang guilty of ethical lapses,
saying that he not only knew that junior scientists in his laboratory
had donated eggs, but that he had also accompanied one of them to a
clinic for the procedure.
Dr Hwang may face criminal
proceedings after South Korean prosecutors said that they would
investigate whether he misused state funds provided for his work.
THE FINDINGS
2005: Science paper claiming creation of 11 lines of stem cells cloned from patients
Verdict: Faked. No proof that any of the lines existed. Panel released interim ruling last month
2004: Science paper claiming creation of first cloned human embryo and extraction of stem cells
Verdict: Faked. DNA fingerprinting tests and photographs fabricated. No proof cloning had occurred
2005: Nature paper claiming cloning of first dog, Snuppy
Verdict: True, so far. Preliminary results of independent DNA tests for Nature suggest Snuppy is a true clone, though confirmation still needed
Egg donation
Verdict: Guilty of unethical behaviour. Hwang knew female researchers from his lab were donating eggs, and accompanied one to a clinic
Technical expertise
Verdict: Not proven. Hwang’s team appears to be able to clone embryos, but there is no proof that stem cells have ever been extracted
THE GREAT PRETENDERS
William
McBride was praised for exposing the dangers of Thalidomide, but
admitted faking data to back up similar claims about Debendox
