Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

lostincalifornia

(5,362 posts)
Fri Aug 15, 2025, 11:30 AM Aug 2025

MIT president Sally Kornbluth responds to Globe report on academic fraud case at Duke

""MIT President Sally Kornbluth responded in a statement Wednesday to a Globe report detailing her time as an administrator at Duke amid a cancer research scandal more than a decade ago, saying she learned lessons from the case that “have powerfully shaped my approach to leadership ever since.”

Kornbluth said she described the case to MIT’s search committee before she was selected as the institute’s new president in 2022.

The Globe’s story, which published online Wednesday morning, said Kornbluth was the dean overseeing clinical research at Duke Medical School when researchers raised concerns about the work of Dr. Anil Potti, who claimed to have created algorithms that could analyze tumors and pick the best chemotherapy cocktail to treat cancer patients.

Potti’s work led to clinical trials that began enrolling patients in 2007. A federal investigation later revealed that Potti had been manipulating data. Critics said some leaders at Duke, including Kornbluth, were slow to shut down the trials after other researchers raised serious concerns.

Patients and their loved ones sued, and Duke settled in 2015 for an undisclosed sum.

In her statement Wednesday, Kornbluth said she was “new to university administration” at the time.

“One formative lesson was the vital importance of establishing and following rigorous and timely internal investigative processes and ensuring that they are entirely independent from those who undertook the work,” she said.

Kornbluth said the case “led to concrete improvements in Duke’s research infrastructure.”


https://www.statnews.com/2025/08/14/mit-president-response-duke-cancer-fraud-investigation/

5 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
MIT president Sally Kornbluth responds to Globe report on academic fraud case at Duke (Original Post) lostincalifornia Aug 2025 OP
Sounds like CYA to me. Xoan Aug 2025 #1
Yeah... harumph Aug 2025 #2
Dr. Kornbluth was at Duke from 1994 to 2022, when she became president of MIT. yardwork Aug 2025 #3
I'm not defending Potti, just speaking generally to the erosion of trust in research harumph Aug 2025 #5
It is not. If anything, she's being overly modest. yardwork Aug 2025 #4

harumph

(3,278 posts)
2. Yeah...
Fri Aug 15, 2025, 12:17 PM
Aug 2025

To paraphrase: when one is new in such a position, it may take time to acquaint oneself with possible research faculty ethics violations and assess the possible ramifications and personal consequences of putting a stop to it. Sounds like she got out as quickly as she could. It's like a decent cop stuck in a department of bad cops. You decide to pick your battles. You make plans to get out. You may have to accept lower pay and relocate your family. That's why I think we sometimes wrongly brow beat individuals who
"shoulda woulda coulda" done the "right thing" without being honest with ourselves. At some point in this culture lying became a common gambit and routine lying will eventually will pervade all professional domains unless an organization/company/university is redundantly reinforcing honesty. For example having a safe non-retaliatory avenue for whistleblowers and the like. Look at Russia. I'm sure there are plenty of basically honest people who are swimming against the tide. At some point, you're like "fuck it - moving to Siberia."

yardwork

(69,364 posts)
3. Dr. Kornbluth was at Duke from 1994 to 2022, when she became president of MIT.
Fri Aug 15, 2025, 12:31 PM
Aug 2025

She is a highly respected cell biologist. She was vice dean for basic sciences when Anil Potti was falsifying data, more than 15 years ago. She and others at Duke put a lot of new guardrails in place to prevent it ever happening again.

Far from "getting out as quickly as possible," Dr. Kornbluth was made provost at Duke in 2014. That's the #2 position at universities and the position responsible for ensuring academic integrity. She is very highly respected and served as provost at Duke for six years, leaving only to become president of one of the top-ranked science institutions in the world.

Nobody at Duke defends Potti. He was a con artist who caused a lot of harm. Virtually everything in your post is the opposite of the truth.

This all happened prior to 2010, fifteen years ago. Why is the Trump administration bringing it up now? Because they're seeking excuses to destroy research institutions.

Please don't help Trump destroy our country by spreading incorrect speculation.

harumph

(3,278 posts)
5. I'm not defending Potti, just speaking generally to the erosion of trust in research
Fri Aug 15, 2025, 01:37 PM
Aug 2025

output due to actual documented cases of researchers making up shit. Prior to Trump's first term and ongoing. My point being that over the past 10 years or so, there has been much press regarding academic dishonesty by researchers not to mention students.

Sure, I absolutely agree that everything Trump highlights is for his (Heritage Foundation's) agenda.

That doesn't mean there is no systemic problem with fabricating data. The stakes are too high.

How Many Scientists Fabricate and Falsify Research? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Survey Data

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2685008/

Conclusion: ...several surveys asking scientists about misconduct have been conducted to date, and the differences in their results are largely due to differences in methods. Only by controlling for these latter can the effects of country, discipline, and other demographic characteristics be studied in detail. Therefore, there appears to be little scope for conducting more small descriptive surveys, unless they adopted standard methodologies. On the other hand, there is ample scope for surveys aimed at identifying sociological factors associated with scientific misconduct. Overall, admission rates are consistent with the highest estimates of misconduct obtained using other sources of data, in particular FDA data audits [11], [18]. However, it is likely that, if on average 2% of scientists admit to have falsified research at least once and up to 34% admit other questionable research practices, the actual frequencies of misconduct could be higher than this.

Fake scientific papers are alarmingly common
But new tools show promise in tackling growing symptom of academia’s “publish or perish” culture

https://www.science.org/content/article/fake-scientific-papers-are-alarmingly-common

Just to be clear - I agree Kornbluth is a good guy and was bemoaning the situation that "good guys" like SK often find themselves in.

yardwork

(69,364 posts)
4. It is not. If anything, she's being overly modest.
Fri Aug 15, 2025, 12:32 PM
Aug 2025

Dr. Sally Kornbluth is one of the good guys. Please don't help Trump destroy research institutions by spreading incorrect speculation.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»MIT president Sally Kornb...