HEADLINES Published August1, 2014 By Staff Reporter

Critical Errors Lead to the Retraction of Supposed to Stem Cell Breakthrough

(Photo : Google Images)

A group of scientists in Japan previously published their study on the Nature Journal, claiming that stem cells could be ethically produced in a quicker and more economical way by simply immersing blood cells into an acid solution. This alleged discovery became invaluable information to researchers across the globe and was quickly classified as one of the most outstanding scientific discoveries of modern times. However, this claim is now being retracted as the team apologizes for what appeared to be multiple errors in their initial report.

As the results of the study of this research team were being reviewed, critical errors began to surface including the passing off of results from earlier work as though it was part of their own new study. Further investigation into the matter revealed that one of the researchers, Dr. Haruko Obokata, may have intentionally fabricated certain portions of her research to provide misleading information.

Based on previous studies stem cells can be used to regrow damaged or lost tissues.  More comprehensive studies have already been launched to investigate the ability of stem cells to heal tissue damage caused by several medical conditions such as the tissue injury that is typically caused by heart attacks on cardiac muscles, and even healing scarred eye tissues to restore eyesight to the blind.

Uncovering the fallacy of this scientific report also brings into question Nature Editorial's reputation for detecting faults in the reports that they publish. The journal has already launched a review of their procedures to increase its validation potential, also stating that they still believe in the peer review system.  Representatives from the publication also said that it would have been a struggle for the participating scientists who were evaluating the paper to pick up on the mistakes in the research since reviewing research material from colleagues usually entailed taking their work on trust. They emphasized that the reviewing body was there to assess the paper, not scrutinize it for fraud.

©2014 YouthsHealthMag.com. All Rights Reserved.