Duke Sued for Millions over Fraudulent Data

A lawsuit claims that Duke University and biologist Erin Potts-Kant used bad data in projects funded by dozens of government grants.

By | September 6, 2016

Duke UniversityFLICKR, PENSDEVILSixty grants worth some $200 million—that’s what biologist Joseph Thomas claims is affected by fraudulent data from Duke University and biologist Erin Potts-Kant, Thomas’s former supervisor, ScienceInsider and Retraction Watch reported last week (September 1). And the university may have to shell out three times that amount if Thomas’s lawsuit is successful.

The Duke case “should scare all [academic] institutions around the country,” attorney Joel Androphy of Berg & Androphy told Retraction Watch. If successful, he added, it could “open the floodgates” to other whistleblowing cases on research misconduct in academia.

Potts-Kant was arrested on charges of embezzlement (totaling more than $25,000) in March 2013. She pled guilty, received a fine and probation, and was ordered to perform community service. Following a Duke investigation, 15 of Potts-Kant’s papers were retracted, some citing “unreliable” data. Additional publications have corrections or expressions of concern.

The lawsuit filed by Thomas was unsealed by a US district court last month, according to the news report; in it, Thomas claims that other researchers at Duke were aware of the problems with Pott-Kant’s work but that the university withheld information from federal funding agencies.

According to Thomas’s complaint, the misconduct affects at least 49 grants worth $82.8 million from federal agencies such as the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the Environmental Protection Agency, and that an additional 15 NIH grants, worth $120.9 million, were awarded based on fraudulent data.

Duke responded to the accusations in a statement: “Even though the full scope of Ms. Potts-Kant’s actions were not known at the time, Duke notified several government agencies in June 2013 about the matter and immediately launched a formal scientific misconduct investigation, as required by federal law.”

Add a Comment

Avatar of: You



Sign In with your LabX Media Group Passport to leave a comment

Not a member? Register Now!

LabX Media Group Passport Logo


Avatar of: dumbdumb


Posts: 94

September 7, 2016

It sucks when things go wrong.

A few years ago, I disproved some results, of a former researcher, that got published in, nothing less than, Nature medicine. I put forward my opinion and data, however, no one payed attention. After all, the researcher jump started his career with that piblication, and both co-authors and the department benefited from such prestigious publication.

Too bad, in the country where this happened, there is not such thing as a 30% share of any funds recovered by whistleblowing.

Avatar of: Paul Stein

Paul Stein

Posts: 237

September 7, 2016

People should go to the "statement" page and then download the lawsuit.  It is quite damning.  Frankly, it's about time someone brought such a suit.  In the past, researchers (sic.) were given a slap on the wrist and the taxpayers were left holding the bag.  Worse, real scientists, and this is stated in the lawsuit, were denied possible grants because the money was shovelled to Duke University.

Popular Now

  1. Can Young Stem Cells Make Older People Stronger?
  2. Thousands of Mutations Accumulate in the Human Brain Over a Lifetime
  3. Two Dozen House Republicans Do an About-Face on Tuition Tax
  4. CRISPR to Debut in Clinical Trials