The panel couldn't find stem cells that match patients' DNA . . . and it believes that Hwang's team doesn't have scientific data to prove that (such stem cells) were made.
So far we could not find any stem cells regarding Dr. Hwang's 2005 paper that genetically match the DNA of patients. Dr. Hwang's team doesn't have scientific data to prove that it has produced such stem cells.
Based on these findings, the data in 2005 was intentionally fabricated, not an accidental error.
Stem cells with DNA matching with patient tissues regarding the 2005 paper were not found. And it is the panel's judgment that Professor Hwang 's team does not have the scientific data to prove that they (patient-specific stem cells) were made.
The data . . . was intentionally fabricated, not an accidental error, and this constituted major misconduct.
This panel couldn't find stem cells that match patients' DNA regarding the 2005 paper, and it believes that Hwang's team didn't secure scientific data to prove that.
There is sufficient evidence that results were deliberately manipulated, and Professor Hwang accepts this at some level. We don't think that the data in the 2005 Science study was incorrect because of simple mistakes.
It is our priority to figure out whether the data used in the experiments had been falsified or not.
It is the panel's judgment that Prof. Hwang's team does not have the scientific data to prove that they (patient-specific stem cells) were made.
It is the panel's judgment that Professor Hwang's team does not have the scientific data to prove that they (patient-specific stem cells) were made.
The errors in data in (Hwang's) 2005 paper in (journal) Science are not simple mistakes, but it was an intentional fabrication to inflate the number of stem cells from two to 11.