SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Submitted via IRC for SoyCow1984
MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, Texas has forced out three senior researchers with ties to China. The move comes amid nationwide investigations by federal officials into whether researchers are pilfering intellectual property from US research institutions and running "shadow laboratories" abroad, according to a joint report by Science magazine and the Houston Chronicle.
The National Institutes of Health began sending letters to the elite cancer center last August regarding the conduct of five researchers there. The letters discussed "serious violations" of NIH policies, including leaking confidential NIH grant proposals under peer review to individuals in China, failing to disclose financial ties in China, and other conflicts of interest. MD Anderson moved to terminate three of those researchers, two of whom resigned during the termination process. The center cleared the fourth and is still investigation[sic] the fifth.
The move follows years of probing from the FBI, which first contacted MD Anderson back in 2015 with such concerns, according to MD Anderson President Dr. Peter Pisters. In December 2017, MD Anderson handed over hard drives containing employee emails to FBI investigators. That same year, a report by the US Commission on the Theft of American Intellectual Property used some rough calculations to estimate that IP theft by all parties cost the country upward of $225 billion, potentially as high as $600 billion, each year. The report called China the "world's principal IP infringer."
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 24 2019, @02:41PM (10 children)
oh how they must hate the internet.
well. you no longer control the horizontal, the vertical, or the flow of information.
research funded by the public should be public.
the benefit is that the advances are made, that's what the public actually needs.
the moment you stop denying access to information, all of these conflicts of interest will disappear and you will be left with scientists who are in it for the science.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday April 24 2019, @03:02PM (9 children)
But, you don't seem to understand the real problem here. It's fine if information flows. But, information shouldn't flow unless politicians are profiting from that flow. 'Member Mitt Romney, and his magic underwear and stuff? When information, equipment, and jobs flowed to China, and he profited from it, that was all good. But, peons can't be doing that.
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by ikanreed on Wednesday April 24 2019, @03:11PM (8 children)
It's amazing the way right wing ideology melts your brain, such that a private "charity" hospital that gets 50% annual "growth" is the fault of those evil meddling government officials in non-specific ways.
MD Anderson should change their slogan to "Making Cancer History. Unless of course that happens to cut into our margins."
This is an institution that every year gets hundreds of millions of people who genuinely want to reduce the scourge of cancer to donate money so we can "find the cure" but jealously guard even intermediate results on the off chance that they could be sold for a profit. Everything about healthcare in the US is fucked, and it's got jack shit to do "politicians" except inasmuch as any of them represent your stupid fucking views.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday April 24 2019, @03:36PM (7 children)
I wonder if you really read my post. My post was an attack on a right winger in specific, and the right wing in general. I said very nearly the same thing you said, in a sarcastic enough way. Information may not flow, unless some politician can make money from the flow. One of us misunderstood the other, I'm sure.
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 2) by ikanreed on Wednesday April 24 2019, @03:38PM (6 children)
Yes, but it's nonetheless untrue that the greedy fuckers here today are in the public sector.
(Score: 3, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 24 2019, @03:55PM (2 children)
My god! You've either lost your mind or have been so brainwashed by the deep state that you can't see the plain truth in front of you!
Martin Shkreli: Just a good-hearted philanthropist trying to make everyone's life better -- thrown in prison because the public sector can't stand to see anyone do good for the populace
Elizabeth Holmes: Another great humanitarian that the public sector has demonized. Stripping her of her assets and now trying to put her in jail. No good deed goes unpunished, eh?
Mark Zuckerberg: Widely (at least by his mother) viewed as the sweetest boy in the world, all he ever wanted to do was to bring those "dumb fucks" together in communities around the world. But no. The public sector has only contempt for those who want to make our lives better.
Travis Kalanick: A truly sensitive, kind and caring person who only wanted to make life easier for everyone, who fought the good fight against the public sector and strove to make the lives of the women around him better ("that was the best 18 seconds of your life, right baby?"). Driven out of his own company. The "public sector" strikes again.
The public sector causes only pain and suffering. Anyone who tries to make the world a better place must be destroyed!
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday April 24 2019, @04:11PM
LOL - especially the (at least by his mother). The real kicker would be, if Zuck's mother despises the little worm she brought into the world.
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 2) by bzipitidoo on Thursday April 25 2019, @05:12AM
You forgot one: Heather Bresch.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 24 2019, @04:46PM (2 children)
Just admit you mischaracterized runaway's post and be done with it.
(Score: 2) by ikanreed on Wednesday April 24 2019, @05:58PM (1 child)
That seems like an unlikely resolution to the problem of runaway blaming everything on a totally absent 3rd party.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 25 2019, @12:40AM
Hey, preaching to the choir here, but his original post was just saying politicians don't support freedom if information unless it lines their pockets. Obviously a gross generalization but he wasn't saying anything crazy this time.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by ikanreed on Wednesday April 24 2019, @03:04PM
Not competition in the realm of treating disease! Dear lord spare us. What if one small part of health care was affordable? How would we survive???
(Score: 4, Informative) by legont on Wednesday April 24 2019, @03:40PM (6 children)
The US steals Chinese talent from China. Chinese talent steals the results back to China. It is theirs to begin with and they are loyal to their motherland.
If the US wants technology safe, it should spend some money to educate local patriots. There is no free lunch here. This is especially obvious since the US did similar things to Great Britain at some point - transferred technology and stopped paying.
One such an Asian researcher in the US wrote an insightful book about it - highly recommended. http://www.personal.ceu.hu/corliss/CDST_Course_Site/Readings_old_2012_files/Ha-Joon%20Chang%20-%20Kicking%20Away%20the%20Ladder-The%20%E2%80%9CReal%E2%80%9D%20History%20of%20Free%20Trade.pdf [personal.ceu.hu]
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday April 24 2019, @04:15PM (2 children)
Nice spin - I like it. TANSTAAFL
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 24 2019, @06:29PM (1 child)
FYATHYRIO
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday April 24 2019, @06:31PM
Don't talk about my horse, bitch!
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 24 2019, @05:14PM
i have to agree. you want something to stay in the US? try teaching USians to do the work , you fucking cheapskates.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday April 24 2019, @05:40PM
That PDF is an excellent read. I've often asked free trade proponents just when we've ever seen free trade. I'd like to compare free trade, to whatever. Alas - Britain only experienced free trade for a rather brief period, and the US rejected free trade out of hand. The quote of US Grant, really surprised me - I didn't think he was enough of a scholar to formulate the concept:
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 24 2019, @10:56PM
Not so much. Ha-Joon Chang/a> is a South Korean National living in the UK: [wikipedia.org]
and he's written several other books that are worth a look too:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bad_Samaritans:_The_Myth_of_Free_Trade_and_the_Secret_History_of_Capitalism [wikipedia.org]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/23_Things_They_Don%27t_Tell_You_About_Capitalism [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Freeman on Wednesday April 24 2019, @03:49PM (1 child)
The United States' use of public funds should benefit the United States public at large. China, is trying to mooch off the US and has been doing it for quite some time. I highly doubt, the United States is the only entity that is targeted by China. Yes, Public funds, Private IP, blah, blah, but at some point, there's got to be incentive. China, the incentive is, I don't want to be on the naughty list, so I can use public transportation, and / or won't have every last penny wrung out of me. The United States incentives are purely monetary, what can I do to get more money for myself and/or my company. Sure, neither system is great, but I would choose the purely monetary system every time. You can rag all out want on the US IP system, etc. The issue at hand is China, taking something from the US, to do the exact same thing the US is doing. You think China is going to be sharing anything? Yeah, right, they'll be sharing it, by selling it for cheaper than we can. They won't be sharing scientific knowledge, they won't be sharing resources, they'll just be selling to us, or selling to everyone else.
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday April 25 2019, @12:57AM
Let's play the devil's advocate for a bit
And... how was the United States public at large been harmed by the knowledge leaking to China?
Given that US has the highest cost for health care (with nothing spectacular for quality [wikipedia.org] compared to the rest of OECD), one would think the lower prices for the same medicine would be a net benefit for the US public.
Unless, of course, Trump's trade wars will increase ... umm, yes, that's the term... tremendously the Big Pharma's bottom line. Do you think Big Pharma is "US public at large"?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0
(Score: 2) by RamiK on Wednesday April 24 2019, @04:21PM (1 child)
Surely if they really committed a crime, they'd be arrested and charged... Right?
Alternatively, what I'm getting from "Breach of peer review confidentiality" is that the pharmaceuticals sent papers to a 100 reviewers so when 97% say it's rubbish they'd release it with the approval of the remaining three. Additionally they performed the experiments in a dozen Chinese and African labs and only included the successful results in their papers. After a while, the Chinese speaking reviewers in MD Anderson picked up on this thanks to some rumors from back home and started contacting relevant labs to double check for the real results and even try and replicate some of simpler experiments. When big-pharma realized this they contacted the hospitals to get them out but the hospital couldn't find a good excuse so the FBI was brought over. They didn't manage to pin anything worthwhile but they did manage to find a loophole in their contracts that got them fired.
How will we know which version is the truth? Easy. When they charge them with a crime they'll give a testimony since their NDA woudln't be effective once under a criminal investigation. Of course, that only works IF they actually charge them with a crime...
compiling...
(Score: 2) by RamiK on Wednesday April 24 2019, @04:26PM
Btw, remember He Jiankui? Everyone said he was using outdated techniques so that alone made his work unethical... Well, a few American researchers were up-to-date with his work (but didn't know about the forged approval papers) and had nothing bad to say about the science it self: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/14/health/gene-editing-babies.html [nytimes.com]
Then and now, the more you dig into these stories the dirtier it gets.
compiling...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 24 2019, @06:38PM
USA itself infringed a lot of "IP" when it was up and coming.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by khallow on Thursday April 25 2019, @12:12AM (1 child)
So we have leaking confidential information about grant proposals - which can help rival research groups unfairly. The latter though is more significant in that the disclosure rules are intended to forestall a huge variety of shenanigans. Imagine funding research for tobacco related cancer risks where the researchers fail to disclose that they are heavily funded by big tobacco firms. That particular bit of fraud can result in propaganda rather than sincere research all on the public dime. Also researchers might be prohibited from patenting publicly funded research, but not private businesses which happen to get informed by an insider before the research becomes public - that creates a nice window of opportunity.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 25 2019, @12:59AM
Nasty, disgusting habit.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 25 2019, @02:16PM
they could be accused of the same thing.
Data theft is ubiquitous in the U.S. We are past the point where there is a question of Constitutional due diligence on the part of Congress or SCOTUS. The states inaction can be regarded as implicit consent of bulk data theft. It isn't a crime, it is a nationally endorsed policy.
IOW, if this is what the FBI is pissed about, WOW are they out of the loop.