Cha sues over IVF critique

Bruce Flamm, a doctor and former research chairman is being sued for defamation by Kwang Yul Cha, the co-author of a 2001 paper that showed couples who were prayed for (but didn't know it) were more likely to conceive during in vitro fertilization. Flamm has linkurl:publicly criticized the paper;http://www.the-scientist.com/article/display/15149/ for years, arguing it was too implausible to be believed. The lawsuit was a complete surprise, Flamm told me today. "I never would have dreamed that, years [after criticizing the paper], this would potentially end up in a jury trial," he said. "To me, it's always been linkurl:a scientific;http://www.the-scientist.com/article/display/22226/ issue, not a personal issue. I've never met Dr. Cha." He had expected his comments to fuel a debate, and feed science's "self-correcting system," Flamm added. "As a research chairman and residency director this is what I have taught young doctors for twenty years. " He said that his lawyer is hopeful the issue can be resolved quickly, but it hasn't stopped his wife from "crying herself to sleep" and fearing they will lose their life savings. "This is a nightmare. " This isn"t the first lawsuit Cha has brought against a researcher. This spring, he allegedly threatened the editor of Fertility & Sterility with legal action after the editor accused Cha and his co-authors of plagiarizing a F&S paper. The editor, Alan DeCherney, linkurl:subsequently retracted comments;http://www.the-scientist.com/news/display/53275/ he made to me and the Los Angeles Times. In his critiques of the prayer-IVF paper, Flamm, based at Kaiser Permanente, noted that it employed a confusing methodology, which required different tiers of prayer groups asking for different outcomes, rather than a simple prayer/no-prayer design. In addition, none of the IVF couples provided informed consent. Last author Rogerio Lobo at Columbia removed his name from the author list, and another co-author, Daniel Wirth, was sent to jail after pleading guilty to a number of charges, including conspiracy to commit mail and bank fraud. Last summer, the Journal of Reproductive Medicine withdrew the study from its Web site. Flamm said that the last couple of years have done nothing to convince him that the research is valid. "It's clear that paper can"t be real," he said. "In my opinion, this lawsuit is an attack on both scientific peer-review and freedom of speech as guaranteed by the First Amendment." A PR firm representing Cha did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Cha sues over IVF critique

The Scientist ARCHIVES

Become a Member of

Meet the Author

Alison McCook

Related Research Resources

Study Confirms Safety of Genetically Modified T Cells

Research Resources

Podcasts

Webinars

Videos

Infographics

eBooks

TaqMan Probe & Assays: Unveil What's Possible Together

Meet Aunty and Tackle Protein Stability Questions in Research and Development

Detecting Residual Cell Line-Derived DNA with Droplet Digital PCR

Making Real-Time PCR More Straightforward

Products

Product News

Biotium Launches New Phalloidin Conjugates with Extended F-actin Staining Stability for Greater Imaging Flexibility

Latest AI software simplifies image analysis and speeds up insights for scientists

BioSkryb Genomics and Tecan introduce a single-cell multiomics workflow for sequencing-ready libraries in under ten hours

Agilent BioTek Cytation C10 Confocal Imaging Reader