Faulty Science

This article can be found at http://www.boston.com/news/science/articles/2010/10/14/harvard_scientists_study_retracted_from_journal/

    This is the second story so far dealing with academic misconduct. And it is the third story about stem cell research. Perhaps the reason these two have crossed paths is the controversial nature of the latter. And the story is meaningful: academic morality is important to uphold in the realm of science, especially with topics as huge as stem cells. No one wants a groundbreaking discovery to be made, and then later find it to be based in faulty research.    
    The article, written by Carolyn Y. Johnson, covers the retraction of a stem cell article published in January in Nature. Johnson’s focus is primarily on the retraction, rather than the science. The whole first half provides quotes from scientists about their concerns and opinions regarding the article retraction. The substance of the article retracted and the further explanation of why it was retracted remain unknown to the reader until the last third of the story. And it’s a cursory explanation at that, with no clarification of the greater implications of the research and why it was so important to retract. Maybe it was Johnson’s orders to focus on the retraction, but a more in-depth look at the science would have put the misconduct into context and it would have made it more interesting.