“Hwang filed an application in Korea in 2003, describing the innovations that he says allowed him to produce a stem-cell line from a cloned human embryo. It follows the structure of his discredited 2004 paper in Science.”

“Schatten’s application, filed in the United States in April 2004, is based on his monkey work, and identifies a method of overcoming a problem he says is encountered with transfer of cell nuclei in primates. It also covers a range of possible uses, including therapies developed from stem cells produced using particular techniques.”

“It is not clear how these claims will pan out. Both are based at least in part on previously established methods, says Margaret Sampson, a patent attorney at Vinson & Elkins in Austin, Texas. And other groups have applied for patents on cloning technologies. ‘Neither Schatten nor Hwang will probably be the undisputed holders of all rights to the technology. It’s more likely that different groups will hold patents on different methods of making and using stem cells,’ she says.”

How is it Schatten is claimed to have “stollen a copyright from Hwang” when it was in fact for a process Hwang was not involved in - the transfer of cell nuclei in primates?

It’s hard to say without studying the process closely, since Schatten does run his own research facility and could have originated these processes entirely on his own. But I think the question of greater importance than who to blame for what is whether the patents of either researcher of any real value, given Hwang’s record of falsified claims.

It seems he became enamored of and ensnared by Hwang and finally agreed to an offer to co-author the 2005 paper. It was, however, largely a long-distance collaboration. Stem cell pioneer John Gearhart says that was a mistake and asserts that Hwang must have duped the University of Pittsberg with some sort of false information according to since “University of Pittsburgh had to have given permission for Jerry to enter into that collaboration.”

An Ann Arbor cell cell researcher is quoted as commenting that “If someone is trying to be duplicitous, it is really easy to be misled.”

So the indications right now are that the University of Pittsberg was duped and that Schatten either showed bad judgement or the University of Pittsberg did, but there is no indication of fraud on their part.

The patent Schatten is seeking is for a “similar procedure to Hwang’s” so it is not yet clear whether Hwang deserves to be credited or not.

Right now I would still charaterize Schatten’s role as questionable, hut not fraudulent.

Another notable scientists at the National Human Genome Research Institute will continue independent testing of Snuppy. Let’s also wait to see what they have to say.

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/.....12326.html