{"id":498833,"date":"2024-01-29T12:35:07","date_gmt":"2024-01-29T17:35:07","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/platohealth.ai\/perspectives-10-years-after-stap-cells-the-culture-of-science-misconduct-hopes-for-progress-the-niche\/"},"modified":"2024-01-29T19:30:43","modified_gmt":"2024-01-30T00:30:43","slug":"perspectives-10-years-after-stap-cells-the-culture-of-science-misconduct-hopes-for-progress-the-niche","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/platohealth.ai\/perspectives-10-years-after-stap-cells-the-culture-of-science-misconduct-hopes-for-progress-the-niche\/","title":{"rendered":"Perspectives 10 years after STAP cells: the culture of science, misconduct, & hopes for progress – The Niche","gt_translate_keys":[{"key":"rendered","format":"text"}]},"content":{"rendered":"
Exactly ten years ago today, on January 29, 2014, I wrote about two new Nature<\/em> papers on so-called STAP cells.<\/strong><\/a> The papers claimed that stress alone could convert regular non-stem cells into some of the most powerful stem cells. More specifically, the authors claimed to make pluripotent stem cells<\/strong><\/a> similar to iPS cells<\/strong><\/a> this way. Maybe even totipotent cells. They called the cells \u201cSTAP cells\u201d or STAP stem cells.<\/p>\n I reviewed the papers journal club style here on The Niche the day they came out. I was already skeptical then. In the weeks after that I felt increasingly convinced that the papers were not only wrong, but also there may have been misconduct. The whole STAP cells idea just didn\u2019t add up.<\/p>\n Ultimately, the papers were retracted and this was an awful, even if temporary situation for the stem cell field and biology more generally.<\/p>\n Today, a decade later on the STAP anniversary, are things better in science related to research misconduct? What perspectives are there now looking back 10 years?<\/p>\n