Dr. Ranjit Chandra's
Patented Multi-Vitamins
Gregory Mountain
Kieran Mullarney
Kristopher Murray
Christopher Osbun
Shreya Patel
Facts of the Case
•
•
•
•
•
•
Dr. Ranjit K. Chandra worked at Memorial
University of Newfoundland in St. John’s,
Canada for 27 years
Dr. Chandra published nearly 200 scientific
papers during his career
In 2001, Nutrition published a paper by Dr.
Chandra in which he suggested a multivitamin
formula that strengthened cognitive function in
the elderly
Dr. Chandra retired from Memorial in 2002
Accusations about the validity of his
multivitamin paper and later his entire body of
work began to arise
In 2005, Nutrition retracted Dr. Chandra’s
multivitamin paper
"Effect of Vitamin and Trace-Element
Supplementation on Cognitive Function in Elderly
Subjects"
Ranjit Kumar Chandra, M.D.
•
•
•
•
Dr. Chandra hypothesized that consumption of adequate
amounts of micronutrients improved cognitive function in
those over the age of 50.
Chandra conducted a random study of 96 individuals over
the age of 65 who were split into a placebo group and a
group that received the vitamin supplement for 1 year
Dr. Chandra’s data suggests that there was a significant
reduction in vitamin deficiencies such as vitamins A, B6, C,
β-carotene, iron and zinc and that there was a significant
improvement of most of the cognitive function tests in the
supplement group.
Dr. Chandra wrote that the subjects who showed deficient
blood levels of 1+ nutrients showed lower scores on all
cognitive tests.
Doubts in validity
•
Beginning in 2003, accusations began to
circulate about the validity of Dr. Chandra’s
multivitamin paper. Some viewed Dr.
Chandra’s data as ‘too good’ and accused
him of fabricating results.
• Dr. Chandra failed to produce raw data
• Some medical journals went so far as to
call Dr. Chandra’s entire body of work into
question.
Patented Formula
•
The multivitamin formula
that Dr. Chandra
developed was licensed
to Boston-based Javaan
Corporation and is
available under the name
Javaan 50.
Investigation
•
•
John Strawbridge, Memorial University’s director
of faculty relations: "The university is not a
watchdog- We are an enabler- and we've done our
job, I think.”
British Medical Journal’s editor, Richard Smith,
explained that this may be due to a conflict of
interest. The university would not want to discover
that one of its own employees had been involved
in such misconduct.
Investigation
• There were political issues in finding
regulatory agencies to investigate Dr.
Chandra’s work.
• Many of the journals which have published
Dr. Chandra’s work fight the idea of
investigating his previous work…
• Secretary of the World Association of
Medical Editors, Pritpal S. Tamber, said,
“There’s no real training for this, and properly
investigating claims of misconduct is
incredibly time-consuming, expensive, and
requires a certain expertise.”
Breached Ethical Issues and Values
• Making scientific claims without supporting
data or any conclusive research or findings
• Fraud in the use of grant money
• Money intended for research resulting in the
betterment of society
• Benefits of research can only be utilized if
sources keep a credible status and remain
ethical in their dealings so that their
research can be used to inform and to
foster further investigation.
Breached Ethical Issues and Values
•
Improper representation of data
• Fabrication of data
Supporting Evidence of Allegations
• Multiple scientific journals and 3
independent US scientists have raised
questions about the validity of Chandra’s
study.
•
•
•
•
•
Never properly addressed
Raw data never provided
Improbable methods and statistics
Measurements out of normal range (impossible)
Disappeared off the grid for some time after
allegations were presented
Actions Resulting in Breach of
Ethics
•
Was the study really conducted?
• Claims that the multi-vitamins reverse
memory loss
• No co-author on his publication
Circumstances and Considerations
•
Stands by his methods and findings
• Pressure to continue to publish
significant scientific findings
• Reputation
• Keep grants & funding
Consequences of Scientific Misconduct
Institutional Level
Dr. Chandra's career
•
•
Reputations of Chandra, Memorial
University, Nutrition were tarnished
•
Deeply ingrained in knowledge base
•
Investigation and remediation are expensive
Consequences of Scientific Misconduct
Consumer Level
Many seniors took
the vitamin thinking
it would work
Now don't trust
other medicines
they need
Consequences of Scientific Misconduct
Societal Level
Retractions rates have skyrocketed
Furthered mistrust of scientific community
http://blogs.nature.com/news/2011/10/the_reasons_for_retraction.html
Recommendations
•
To prevent the violation of ethics:
o Chandra: Do ethical research (don’t
make up data)
o Memorial University: Should hold
researchers accountable
o Nutrition Journal: Should have found
same issues BMJ did
Recommendations
•
To prevent the violation of ethics:
o BMJ: Instead of just rejecting paper, do
something about suspected fraudulent
research
o Scientific Community: Develop standard
way to deal with cases of fraud like this
with harsh punishments
Preventing further incidents
Researchers should...
be ethical, and also educated
about what is and what isn't
allowed.
hold co-workers accountable.
Journals should...
pay attention to plausibility of
data, and if they find something
suspicious, do more than just
reject paper.
Preventing further incidents
Universities and Employers should...
take allegations of fraud seriously and have a
set way to handle situation.
educate about fraud and have harsh
punishments.
Funders of Research should...
hold researchers accountable by retracting
funds or making it more difficult to get grants.
Why Should We Care?
It is important to know about this case today
because knowing about the consequences of
fraud can help prevent it in the future.
Cases like this
make the scientific
community look
bad, and can have
serious and broad
consequences.
References
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3195176/
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/06/us/a-top-scientist-s-research-is-under-attack.html
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1181274/
http://media.sethroberts.net/chandra/2003_Chandra_letter_in_Nutrition.pdf
http://www.bmj.com/content/328/7431/67?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&author1=w
hite&andorexactfulltext=and&searchid=1135777379569_4719&FIRSTINDEX=0&sortspec=relevance&volum
e=328&firstpage=67&resourcetype=1
http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/24822/title/Under-suspicion--but-not-retracted/
http://ori.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/editor_retreat.pdf