• Welcome to Phoenix Rising!

    Created in 2008, Phoenix Rising is the largest and oldest forum dedicated to furthering the understanding of and finding treatments for complex chronic illnesses such as chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), fibromyalgia (FM), long COVID, postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS), mast cell activation syndrome (MCAS), and allied diseases.

    To become a member, simply click the Register button at the top right.

Judy Mikovits has been arrested

Messages
10,157
Judy's lawyer has said that he was going to use the cells for other purposes than the NIH grant and these cells were paid for by the NIH grant and not deemed for other research. An ethical problem.

I followed up on this comment. Indeed, her lawyer did say that:
While waiting for a research associate to pick her up so she could pick up her car rental to drive home in, Dr. Mikovits was outside of her residence on Sierra St in Reno, she received a call from Annette Whittemore. Mrs. Whittemore made an unreasonable and unethical demand that Dr. Mikovits give Dr. Lombardi a cell line paid for by her R01 NIH grant funding.

I also looked up comments made by Judy Mikovits about why she was fired:


In a 1 October written response to Whittemore, Mikovits contended that it was "completely appropriate" for her, as research director, not to give Lombardi the cell line. The cell line was not related to studies of the gammaretroviruses, but Lombardi wanted to use it for experiments connected to a grant Mikovits had secured from the U.S. National Institutes of Health to study possible causes of CFS. Mikovits contended that Lombardi "was unwilling to take my direction" and should not be undertaking a new project "while neglecting his other duties." She also questioned his ability to carry out that experiment.

This only further confuses me.
 

leela

Senior Member
Messages
3,290
Yes, and interesting as well that in the first Pfost affadavit the cell line issue is mentioned, yet in the second affadavit it is not mentioned.
So, first it was about the cell lines, about which JM would not cede, so she was fired. Thus, the civil suit was about intellectual property, since it seems that the cell line issue is not legally withing WPIs purview.
 

Andrew

Senior Member
Messages
2,513
Location
Los Angeles, USA
Here's what I remember

Judy said she refused to turn over the cells because they are part of the grant.
Annette said Judy misrepresented the situation.
Pfost said they cells were mailed to Lombardi
Judy's lawyer was not there, so I assume his comment is based on what Judy told him.

Out of all that, I can make guesses, but nothing is definitive. For example, I can guess they were supposed to go to Lombardi (because they were mailed to him), but maybe they were addressed to him by mistake because he is associated with the first study. So who knows.
 

JT1024

Senior Member
Messages
582
Location
Massachusetts
Joshua..

I may be wrong...I'll have to investigate further.. but if I'm not mistaken, the LAST author mentioned in a publication is the principal investigator/author not the first.

If you check into pubs by Coffin, Miller, or anyone else, they are usually the last name, not the first.

I believe the person listed at the beginning has the least contribution, NOT the most.
 

urbantravels

disjecta membra
Messages
1,333
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Joshua.

If you check into pubs by Coffin, Miller, or anyone else, they are usually the last name, not the first.

I believe the person listed at the beginning has the least contribution, NOT the most.

No, that's not how it works. There are conventions, but they are not always rigidly adhered to, about who gets listed as an author and in what order.

http://sciencecareers.sciencemag.or...s_issues/articles/2010_04_16/caredit.a1000039

"In the score-keeping that scientists do, first author is the most coveted slot," says Janet Stemwedel, who teaches ethics in science at San Jos State University in California and writes the Adventures in Ethics and Science blog. Primary authorship is highly valued because it usually indicates who had the idea, who was the "main mover" in the work, or both, Kosslyn says. And because of the way work gets cited (e.g., "First Author, et al., 2010") the first author's name is the most visible to readers. Sometimes more than one author can be "first," indicated by an asterisk or other typographical symbol and an explanatory note. But the person listed first is always the most visible.

With credit comes responsibility: Who is to blame if something's wrong? Typically -- but not always -- the author listed last is the head of the lab that hosted most of the research. Ideally, this senior author has inspected all the original data analyzed and reported in a paper, notes Randy Schekman, editor-in-chief of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS). Consequently, the last author often gets the most grief if things go wrong -- and much of the credit when things go right. "The proverbial buck stops there," Schekman says.

Having one person ultimately responsible for everything in a paper is a fine idea. Yet, in collaborative projects involving diverse disciplines and institutions, it's unrealistic to expect one person to be able to vouch for every piece of experimental data, says Bruce Alberts, editor-in-chief of Science, the parent publication of Science Careers. Some journals now require a senior author from each lab to review all of the data generated by their labs and its interpretation. The result is that in complex projects, there can be more than one "last author" just as there can be more than one "first" author; this, too, is usually indicated with typographic symbols and explanatory footnotes.
 
Messages
20
I just looked up information regarding cell lines from Japan. A researcher has to fill out a form stating they will not give the cell lines to 3rd parties, acknowledge the person who developed the cell lines, that they will not use the cell lines for unethical research etc. I don't see, if Lombardi ordered the cell lines from Japan, how Judy Mikovits could tell him he couldn't use them. If they came from Japan, then she had no ownership over them.

According to Max Pfost, he says the package arrived from Japan addressed to Lombardi and he opened it and called Mikovits. She told Pfost that she would look after it. Later she got fired. It seems it was over this issue. Mikovits has stated that Lombardi couldn't have the cell lines because it would be "unethical". This is where there is information missing. If Mikovits was using the same cell lines for her research, why was Lombardi not allowed to order the same cell lines from a third party company and use them for whatever he was researching or looking into. I don't really understand why the use of cell lines from Japan would have been unethical and Judy never really explained this.

I suppose this is more information we won't know until more information is released.

Yes! If the cell lines from Japan were addressed to Lombardi then they should have been delivered to Lombardi. I don't understand Judy's claim that it would be unethical for Lombardi to use them. Lombardi's name is listed on the Science paper (Lombardi et al) along with Judy's and that research was funded by the NIH grant. Are they not a research team? Judy may have been the PI but the grant money belongs to WPI. Judy's behavior just seems really odd to me. I certainly hope all parties can negotiate some kind of workable agreement so some kind of CFS/ME research came move forward.
 

Andrew

Senior Member
Messages
2,513
Location
Los Angeles, USA
Well, a couple things. All we have is Pfost's word that it was addressed that way. Also, Lambardi being part of the first study doesn't mean he is part of the current one. OTOH, the grant was given to WPI, not Judy. So in a way, they call the shots.

Let's assume for a moment that Judy did what Pfost claims. We all know how passionate Judy is, and in her actions she was probably doing what she thought was best for the research. She felt a great obligation to patients, and assumed she was the best person to complete it. Assuming she took them, that is. This is just speculation. OTOH, WPI has a responsibility for all that research. And if notebooks suddenly go missing, Annette would be a lousy manager if she didn't take action. And taking legal action in what looks like a theft makes sense.

I hope that WPI gets their stuff back. I hope whatever charges are against Judy can go away. I don't think this is entirely in Annette's hands now, because the police are involved. But I hope this can all happen with the least amount of damage to everyone.

For all the pain this has caused for them and patients, I think the ME/CFS cause is better off because of the two of them. They put ME/CFS onto the world stage, and the setbacks with XMRV have not removed it. There are more scientists involved now than before. It's just so unfortunate that the WPI thing has turned into such a mess.
 
Messages
20
Well, a couple things. All we have is Pfost's word that it was addressed that way. Also, Lambardi being part of the first study doesn't mean he is part of the current one. OTOH, the grant was given to WPI, not Judy. So in a way, they call the shots.

Let's assume for a moment that Judy did what Pfost claims. We all know how passionate Judy is, and in her actions she was probably doing what she thought was best for the research. She felt a great obligation to patients, and assumed she was the best person to complete it. Assuming she took them, that is. This is just speculation. OTOH, WPI has a responsibility for all that research. And if notebooks suddenly go missing, Annette would be a lousy manager if she didn't take action. And taking legal action in what looks like a theft makes sense.

I hope that WPI gets their stuff back. I hope whatever charges are against Judy can go away. I don't think this is entirely in Annette's hands now, because the police are involved. But I hope this can all happen with the least amount of damage to everyone.

For all the pain this has caused for them and patients, I think the ME/CFS cause is better off because of the two of them. They put ME/CFS onto the world stage, and the setbacks with XMRV have not removed it. There are more scientists involved now than before. It's just so unfortunate that the WPI thing has turned into such a mess.

A statement made today on the Whittemore Peterson Institute Facebook wall states:
"We are thankful that most of our property has been returned."

So it looks like Judy's arrest did result in locating at least most of the items gone missing from WPI. You are right about this unfortunate mess bringing a lot of attention to CFS/ME. I don't think this going to turn out well for Judy's career and her ability to further her research. But ..hopefully it can be a catalyst to something good for CFS/ME in the future!
 

Ecoclimber

Senior Member
Messages
1,011
Eh ecoclimber you're all heart!! you missed this bit out

'Emmett Littleton, a deacon at her church.
His wife, Sherelyn, visited Mikovits in jail yesterday and told the story of her trying to help another inmate make bail so she would not miss work today. "Judy is all heart," Sherelyn said. "Her whole interest is in helping patients, and everything that she has done is for that end."

Dang, people think I got soft or something. Just remember something here, that I picked up. I just remember something from my law enforcement days that stuck me as odd about those affidavits and also all this negotiation. Something seemed very strange.

This is a criminal investigation. WPI reported they called the police in so it became a police investigation, a criminal matter not a civil matter now.

So Max Pfost affidavit was singed by a private notary public employed by the institution which employees him as well....hmmm. Who read him his Miranda Rights and the right to speak to an attorney? This is a criminal case now! I know they didn't have to but could his affidavits be considered fruits from a poison tree? That the affidavit would be thrown out in a criminal trial for violating his Fifth Amendment Rights? Maybe they figured this all in? There was no signed confession by a police agency acting as a third disinterested party who is conducting the investigation witnessed by a detective. By the way,The university of Nevada police dept. is investigating the case. When the police feel that they have sufficient evidence they will present it to the DA's where he will assess the charges or present it before secret grand jury. Perhaps everything is sealed right now.

But it is strange that the WPI and Mikovits are in negotiation. You don't do that with the private party you just robbed in a criminal case, but you negotiate with the DA's Office not the WPI...very strange. This has gone from a civil case to a criminal case and is now taken out of the hands of the WPI.

These crimes become acts against the citizens of Nevada and whoever else is involved. You could have number of entities, Mikovits, WPI, Police, The DA, Feds and other perps involved in this. There are still some very serious charges that they are looking into.

If the events as stated were true you have conspiracy to commit a crime, stolen property, crossing state lines with the intent to commit a crime, crossing state lines in the commission of felony, stolen goods possession, research espionage, interfering in the operations of a business, stealing Federal property, using emails in the commission of a crime which could invoke RICO, destruction of stolen property, fraud...to name just a few. I believe the Feds will sooner or later get involve. On the other hand if Judy's version plays out, you will have false reporting of everything, filing false police reports, false imprisonment, perjury, libel, slander, defamation of character etc.

All of this is a bit odd though.

Eco
 

jenbooks

Guest
Messages
1,270
It's a power struggle, I think, over whether a research director of a lab is running the lab and deciding what is being studied, and who is doing what...or whether someone in Annettte's capacity can override the research director's decisions and tell researchers they can work on something else, etc.

I believe the cell line was ordered from Japan because Judy was holding the first cell line and not wanting Lombardi to work on it.

I agree with Judy here. She was hired as research director, and until she's fired or demoted, she's research director, and she decides what's being done in the lab. A non scientist can't make those decisions, especially in a lab that has national attention for possible contamination, possibly falsfiying data, etc. The research director is really under a huge responsibility in such case. Demote her, promote someone else, or fire her, then you can do that. It seems like a power struggle, in that Lombardi wanted to work on that cell line, and Annette apparently agreed, but Judy did not. So she held the cell line, from my understanding, and then Lombardi just ordered it from Japan instead.

Why she didn't want him working on that cell line at that time, who knows. It could be priorities of her own as to what's important in a lab struggling financially, or it could be more power struggle, not wanting to share etc. But if she was still research director, and still responsible for everything happening in the lab therefore, I can see her point. If her employer did not like it, then fire her, and then let Lombardi order the cell lines. IMHO.


Yes! If the cell lines from Japan were addressed to Lombardi then they should have been delivered to Lombardi. I don't understand Judy's claim that it would be unethical for Lombardi to use them. Lombardi's name is listed on the Science paper (Lombardi et al) along with Judy's and that research was funded by the NIH grant. Are they not a research team? Judy may have been the PI but the grant money belongs to WPI. Judy's behavior just seems really odd to me. I certainly hope all parties can negotiate some kind of workable agreement so some kind of CFS/ME research came move forward.
 
Messages
69
I am not sure if the research director is the one who decides what is going to be researched, because is an employee.
 

liquid sky

Senior Member
Messages
371
If the cell line from Japan was payed for by money from the NIH grant, but was going to be used on another project, that is fraud. We do not know the particulars, but private affadavits from the company seem rather twisted.

It all has the appearance of being inappropriate, as if some decided they do not have to play by the rules.
 

jenbooks

Guest
Messages
1,270
Santi, that seems a foolish statement to me. Science is not publishing, but as an analogy, I can't imagine the actual owner of a magazine saying to the editor in chief, You may want to do this particular story yourself, but I'm going to let junior editor susie woozie do it. The editor in chief says, No, I'm keeping my sources to myself, I want to do this story later, it's not right to do it now for various reasons. Then the owner says to susie woozie, go ahead, go find the sources yourself and do the story.

Why do you have an editor in chief?
Why do you have a research director?
You either do, or you don't.
Sounds like poor management skills at best....

Which doesn't at all address 1) fraud? 2) contamination 3) retraction 4) stealing notebooks 5) lying about it (true to the letter not the spirit, she herself did not steal the notebooks per se, she asked Max to according to his affadvit, but in every other sense apparently she did and 6) influencing a young researcher (Pfost) in a direction that probably tanked his career for good.

Sounds like emotion driven and really poor judgment...and maybe worse, who knows. I guess we'll find out over time.


I am not sure if the research director is the one who decides what is going to be researched, because is an employee.
 
Messages
20
It's a power struggle, I think, over whether a research director of a lab is running the lab and deciding what is being studied, and who is doing what...or whether someone in Annettte's capacity can override the research director's decisions and tell researchers they can work on something else, etc.

I believe the cell line was ordered from Japan because Judy was holding the first cell line and not wanting Lombardi to work on it.

I agree with Judy here. She was hired as research director, and until she's fired or demoted, she's research director, and she decides what's being done in the lab. A non scientist can't make those decisions, especially in a lab that has national attention for possible contamination, possibly falsfiying data, etc. The research director is really under a huge responsibility in such case. Demote her, promote someone else, or fire her, then you can do that. It seems like a power struggle, in that Lombardi wanted to work on that cell line, and Annette apparently agreed, but Judy did not. So she held the cell line, from my understanding, and then Lombardi just ordered it from Japan instead.

Why she didn't want him working on that cell line at that time, who knows. It could be priorities of her own as to what's important in a lab struggling financially, or it could be more power struggle, not wanting to share etc. But if she was still research director, and still responsible for everything happening in the lab therefore, I can see her point. If her employer did not like it, then fire her, and then let Lombardi order the cell lines. IMHO.

Yes! Its sad that the work at WPI that started out as a research team effort (Lombardi et al) seems to have become so divided. There are probably many factors that led the WPI working relationships to deteriorate to where they are fighting over cell lines. In fighting seems to have replaced staying focused on the goal. Bad decisions were made by many! Its a shame for all of us!


It has kept CFS/ME in the news so hopefully something good will eventually come of this!
 

gregf

Senior Member
Messages
144
Location
Sydney Australia
Missing notebooks returned to Reno chronic disease lab.

http://t.co/fp1Sjaab.

In a sworn affidavit, Max Pfost, Mikovits' former assistant, stated that Mikovits directed him to remove the research materials from the lab, but he was skeptical whether she had the right to do that.

"Mikovits stated that she was in charge of the research at (the institute) so technically it was her research and she could move it somewhere else at any time," Pfost's affidavit states. "Mikovits gave me the keys to her desk and the keys to her office."