Hwang Woo Suk: fall from a high pedestal

Published in The Hindu on December 29, 2005

Cloning human embryos for use in research, drug development and for treating patients suffering from cell based diseases such as diabetes, Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s and spinal cord injury, to name a few, achieved the greatest setback on December 23, 2005.

That was the day when the interim report from the Seoul National University (SNU) Investigation Committee after conducting its investigation of Hwang Woo Suk’s paper published in the journal Science in June 2005 was sent to the journal.

Deliberate manipulation

The report stated, “The experimental data submitted to Science in support of 11 stem lines were all derived from 2 cell lines.” It went on to state that, “The Committee finds that the experimental data published in the 2005 Science paper were based on deliberate manipulation, in other words, a fabrication of research results.”

The journal’s prompt publication of an `Editorial Expression of Concern’ based on the report from the Committee brought the curtain down on one of the biggest scientific frauds in recent times. Editorial expression of concern is a journal’s way of officially informing the readers about the concerns raised about the validity of a paper published in that journal.

All that is now left to be done is a formal retraction of the paper by the journal. That should not take much time. According to Science, Prof. Hwang and Gerald Schatten of the University of Pittsburgh, one of the co-authors of the paper, have already requested the journal to retract the paper. The journal has to wait for all the co-authors to agree on this before retracting the paper.

The June 2005 paper claimed that 11 stem cell lines were created by using the cells (somatic) taken from patients who were suffering from certain diseases. This was considered a major `advancement’ as it came many steps closer to treating people with certain diseases using the therapeutic cloning procedure.

Unfortunately, for medical science and for thousands of people suffering from diseases and who saw a ray of hope in therapeutic cloning as a possible way of curing their diseases, the hope was short lived.

Hwang’s methodical manipulation of data is, to say the least, shocking. According to Science, “The panel had found that DNA fingerprint traces conducted on the stem cell lines had been manipulated to make it seem as if the lines were tailored to specific patients.”

But the more damning finding was that Hwang had “sent two samples from the donor to be tested rather than a sample from the donor and a sample of cells into which the donor’s DNA had supposedly been transplanted.”

Whistle blower

Prof. Hwang’s 2005 paper came under scrutiny when questions — image duplication and DNA fingerprinting — were posted on an Internet message board by the Biological Research Information Centre (BRIC). According to Science, the message board writer claimed to be a life science researcher.

Producing patient-specific stem cell lines was one of the `achievements’ of the June 2005 paper. `Success’ in using fewer eggs (185) to produce 31 embryos and finally `harvesting’ stem cell lines from 11 was another.

In the March 2004 paper published in Science, Prof. Hwang had claimed to have `succeeded’ in cloning human embryos. He had used 242 eggs to produce 30 embryos from which just one stem cell line was produced.

Reducing the number of eggs required for producing cloned embryos is quite significant. Collecting eggs, unlike collecting semen, is quite demanding on the donors; women have to undergo hormonal treatment and the process of extracting eggs is also invasive. Hence not many women come forward to donate eggs.

Science noted that the Committee had found that Prof. Hwang had used a far larger number of eggs for his 2005 paper; the exact number is yet to be determined, though.

Contrary to documents provided to the journal, the Committee found that volunteers were indeed paid for donating eggs. Further, it came to light that two researchers under Prof. Hwang’s supervision had donated eggs.

Question of coercion

Donation from juniors working in the same laboratory raises an ethical issue — the possibility of donation under coercion.

Though this violation may pale in comparison with other serious ethical malpractices and violations, donation of eggs by Prof. Hwang’s researchers may provide the much-needed ammunition to those opposed to cloning human embryos.

Apart the possibility of a maverick using the technique to clone humans and the question of `killing’ embryos for harvesting stem cells, opponents have pointed out the possibility of exploitation of women for eggs.

Last hope

It remains to be seen if the two stem cell lines he produced are genuine. That may indeed be a saving grace for Prof. Hwang to prove that he had indeed been able to produce patient-specific cell lines. Prof. Hwang has already resigned from the SNU.

If proved otherwise, therapeutic cloning as a means to treat diseases may be many years away. And the ghost of one of the biggest frauds of science may well haunt him for the rest of his life.

More so, if the investigations on his first `success’ of cloning human embryos and his latest `achievement’ in cloning the Afghan hound Snuppy (standing for SNU puppy) are proved to be the result of data fabrication.