Results 1 to 16 of 16
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Skinker-DeBaliviere, Saint Louis

    Duke on 60 Minutes

    I am in a public place with a TV that has no sound and no titles. 60 Minutes keeps showing pretty pictures of West Campus and extreme closeups of a dude with glasses on.

    It looks like an expose and it seems to have something to do with cancer. What's going on?

    A movie is not about what it's about; it's about how it's about it.
    ---Roger Ebert


    Some questions cannot be answered
    Who’s gonna bury who
    We need a love like Johnny, Johnny and June
    ---Over the Rhine

  2. #2

    Potti Story...

    Quote Originally Posted by throatybeard View Post
    I am in a public place with a TV that has no sound and no titles. 60 Minutes keeps showing pretty pictures of West Campus and extreme closeups of a dude with glasses on.

    It looks like an expose and it seems to have something to do with cancer. What's going on?
    http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18560_16...in;cbsCarousel

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    The City of Brotherly Love
    Quote Originally Posted by throatybeard View Post
    I am in a public place with a TV that has no sound and no titles. 60 Minutes keeps showing pretty pictures of West Campus and extreme closeups of a dude with glasses on.

    It looks like an expose and it seems to have something to do with cancer. What's going on?
    Back in the day, those of us in corporate America use to say it was a very bad day when Mike Wallace showed up at the front door with a camera crew. Suffice it to say that tonight's 60 Minutes story about "the biggest fraud in medical research" was not good for the brand.
    Last edited by 77devil; 02-12-2012 at 08:11 PM.

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by 77devil View Post
    Back in the day, those of us in corporate America use to say it was a very bad day when Mike Wallace showed up at the front door with a camera crew. Suffice it to say that tonight's 60 Minutes story about "the biggest fraud in medical research" was not good for the brand.

    It's all about Anil Potti and his "research".

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by 77devil View Post
    Back in the day, those of us in corporate America use to say it was a very bad day when Mike Wallace showed up at the front door with a camera crew. Suffice it to say that tonight's 60 Minutes story about "the biggest fraud in medical research" was not good for the brand.
    I believe this story was pretty compartmentalized with Potti. Never good when 60 Minutes comes calling, but I actually thought this reflected as well as possible on Duke in the end. Research integrity and trust between colleagues and staff is a given in most circumstances. This truly is a cautionary tale for other institutions. There are unfortunately too many individual bold, unethical, souless scientists that care more about their perceived stature than finding real solutions. Same in finance, government, etc. Sad deal. Sorry our great University had this chump on board.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    The City of Brotherly Love
    Quote Originally Posted by hughgs View Post
    It's all about Anil Potti and his "research".
    Pray tell. I saw the segment. What do you think the typical viewer will take away from then story and remember, Anil Potti or Duke?

  7. #7
    Yea, I just got done watching the segment online. Obviously, it is NEVER a good day when 60 Minutes shows up at your doorstep to do an expose. How much damage this segment will do to the Duke "brand" remains to be seen, even though there is NO evidence that anyone other than Dr. Potti knew of the fraud and deception that took place in the research. I think Scott Pelley and 60 Minutes were trying to get Duke to admit that they overlooked any suspicions about the quality of the research because they knew that this would be extremely lucrative for the university, if true. I'm not sure how many viewers will accept this premise. The unfortunate fact is that it is difficult for any university to monitor the work of hundreds or even thousands of individuals who may work there and be producing research. Obviously, a blemish on Duke but I'm not sure that it is a permanent blemish.

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by 77devil View Post
    Pray tell. I saw the segment. What do you think the typical viewer will take away from then story and remember, Anil Potti or Duke?
    I didn't watch the series, I've already followed the story and wasn't interested in someone else's spin.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    New York, NY
    terrible event, but I thought Duke came out ok, all things considered.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    lives near a number of big white buildings
    First time I've heard about this. Sounds like Potti's conduct was outrageous and he should have the book thrown at him in every sense. However, members of the Duke community, above all others, should have learned through the lacrosse hoax and through the general unfair villification of Duke basketball, Duke student body characteristics, alleged Duke snobbery, etc., to be careful of making judgments untill all facts are known and correlated.

    Not sure the Jacobs case is a legal winner for plantiffs but sure sounds awful nonetheless.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    lives near a number of big white buildings

    additional thoughts--after viewing video

    Wrote the above based on the 60 Minutes article--when given a choice, I'll almost always read a transcript rather than watch a video because it is more efficient and more "objective." But this is one example where the video yields some additional thoughts now that I've watched it.

    The Duke employees could certainly use a little more media training. They weren't a disaster on camera but could have chosen their words a bit more carefully.

    Have there been any housecleanings at Duke of the people who supervised Potti? Got to do this carefully so as not to impact the case(s).

    I'd think a cooperative initiative in conjunction with other major health research universities regarding verification of credentials and tighter continuing review of research might not only be in Duke's interests but benefit the public and all such universities.

    The video version made me sad and angry. I've met so many bright, talented people, drunk with ambition, who have relied on deceit to advance their career progress and recognition. In many (though not all) instances these were people who legitimately thought they were devoted in general to doing good--and in fact to a great extent were doing good. But they often had a compulsion to embellish their backgrounds, often needlessly, or to misrepresnt elements of their past or current work.

    Why does this go on to this extent? There must be more at play in many than the lust for greater economic success or career recognition. Insecurity? Living with the fear of being found out to be a fraud (apparently a common fear of successful men from what I've read) so one lives up (?) to it? A secret desire to be caught in actual fraud--or to see how much one could push the envelope without being caught?

  12. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by SmartDevil View Post
    Wrote the above based on the 60 Minutes article--when given a choice, I'll almost always read a transcript rather than watch a video because it is more efficient and more "objective." But this is one example where the video yields some additional thoughts now that I've watched it.

    The Duke employees could certainly use a little more media training. They weren't a disaster on camera but could have chosen their words a bit more carefully.

    Have there been any housecleanings at Duke of the people who supervised Potti? Got to do this carefully so as not to impact the case(s).

    I'd think a cooperative initiative in conjunction with other major health research universities regarding verification of credentials and tighter continuing review of research might not only be in Duke's interests but benefit the public and all such universities.

    The video version made me sad and angry. I've met so many bright, talented people, drunk with ambition, who have relied on deceit to advance their career progress and recognition. In many (though not all) instances these were people who legitimately thought they were devoted in general to doing good--and in fact to a great extent were doing good. But they often had a compulsion to embellish their backgrounds, often needlessly, or to misrepresnt elements of their past or current work.

    Why does this go on to this extent? There must be more at play in many than the lust for greater economic success or career recognition. Insecurity? Living with the fear of being found out to be a fraud (apparently a common fear of successful men from what I've read) so one lives up (?) to it? A secret desire to be caught in actual fraud--or to see how much one could push the envelope without being caught?
    And on the other side, universities today, Duke included, see themselves as a business. And as a business, they urge faculty to get SBIRs. The administration embraces faculty who develop SBIR's - often blindly without understanding anything but the fact that they see $$$. Universities see SBIR's as the holy grail. That's Duke and every other university.
    ~rthomas


  13. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by SmartDevil View Post
    Have there been any housecleanings at Duke of the people who supervised Potti? Got to do this carefully so as not to impact the case(s).
    I can not imagine Duke pushing Joe Nevins out the door. Having worked in cancer research during my ugrad days a life time ago, I meet him a few times. My boss was both a grad student and post doc in one of his labs. He was a good guy, a great teacher and a respected researcher. I doubt that has changed. I did get the feeling that he was very trusting of the people working under him which might be part of the problem.

    Here's an older article from the Economist that has a feel more details.
    http://www.economist.com/node/21528593

  14. #14
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Tennessee
    Quote Originally Posted by johnb View Post
    terrible event, but I thought Duke came out ok, all things considered.
    Too bad the same thing can't be said for the 112 patients.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Quote Originally Posted by cspan37421 View Post
    Too bad the same thing can't be said for the 112 patients.
    Weren't the chemotherapies compared in the clinical trials already standard of treatment, as in known to be non-inferior to each other? His research claimed to be able to predict some patients would respond better than others. However, the known body of knowledge said they were all about the same meaning the trials wouldn't have hurt the patient.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Tennessee
    Quote Originally Posted by duke09hms View Post
    Weren't the chemotherapies compared in the clinical trials already standard of treatment, as in known to be non-inferior to each other? His research claimed to be able to predict some patients would respond better than others. However, the known body of knowledge said they were all about the same meaning the trials wouldn't have hurt the patient.
    From the transcript, p. 4 of the above link, that is the position Duke is taking.

    From the transcript, p. 2, Coombes and Baggerly of MD Anderson in Houston, appear to have a sharply differing opinion.

Similar Threads

  1. Most minutes played at Duke?
    By Lord Ash in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 01-17-2009, 01:37 AM
  2. Too Many Minutes... Again?
    By BlueintheFace in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: 01-16-2009, 11:44 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •