STAP細胞捏造事件の真相は？｜掲示板スレッド

＞だったら笹井はなぜ死んだの？　　説明してくれる。

それは、日本のマスコミ等による笹井氏に対する根拠のない誹謗中傷、および改革委員会（岸輝雄委員長）によるあまりにも不合理な突然のCDB解体提言によるものです。

このことは、笹井氏の死に際して、笹井氏家族の弁護士から、残された遺書の内容とともに、記者会見の場において、明確に説明されたことであります。

さらに、それを受けて、小保方論文取り下げを決定したネイチャー誌ですら、そのブログニュース等において、日本マスコミの常軌を逸した報道姿勢および改革委員会の理不尽な提言に対して、厳しい批判を行わざるを得なかったのです。

日本のマスコミでは、それらの事実がほとんど報道されておりません。

＞論文が撤回されたということは、論文の結論が否定されたということとイコールではありません。

これは、その通り。


＞さらに、それを受けて、小保方論文取り下げを決定したネイチャー誌ですら、そのブログニュース等において、日本マスコミの常軌を逸した報道姿勢および改革委員会の理不尽な提言に対して、厳しい批判を行わざるを得なかったのです。

具体的に。

＞具体的に。

この記事です。


＊＊＊＊＊

Stem-cell pioneer blamed media 'bashing' in suicide note


Lawyer for Yoshiki Sasai's family reveals motive of Japanese researcher's act following STAP controversy.

David Cyranoski

13 August 2014 Clarified: 15 August 2014


A note left by a Japanese stem-cell researcher before he took his own life blames the storm of media attention around the retraction of two papers for his suicide, a lawyer working for his family said in a press conference.

In the days following the tragic death of Yoshiki Sasai on 5 August, scientists, journalists and bloggers in Japan have been speculating about the reasons behind it. Sasai, a 52-year-old world-renowned stem-cell scientist at the RIKEN Center for Developmental Biology (CDB) in Kobe, Japan, had been entangled in a controversy over the past six months surrounding two stem-cell papers that he co-authored. The papers1, 2 were published in Nature in January, but then retracted in July.

At a press conference on 12 August, Kazuhiro Nakamura, a lawyer representing Sasai’s family, summarized the contents of the suicide note left by Sasai to his family. In it, Sasai that said he was “worn out by the unjust bashing in the mass media and the responsibility he felt towards RIKEN and his laboratory”, according to Nakamura. The lawyer would not release a full version of the note, citing Sasai’s wishes and concern for the family.


The two Nature papers described a method for converting mature mouse cells to an embryonic-like state by subjecting them to stress — for example, by immersing them in acid — a method known as stimulus-triggered acquisition of pluripotency, or STAP. Duplicated and manipulated images were soon found in the papers. A RIKEN internal investigation committee found Haruko Obokata, the lead author of the papers, guilty of scientific misconduct in April (see Nature's special collection 'The rise and fall of STAP').

The internal committee found Sasai to hold “grave responsibility” for failure of oversight, but concluded that he was innocent of any direct involvement with the problematic data.

Media claims

But in the months after publication, Sasai was hammered in the Japanese media, with people reflecting on his responsibility for the papers and delving into his personal life. Many articles in the press made unsubstantiated claims about his motivations, including one article in the 17 April issue of Shukan Bunshun that tied Sasai’s involvement with the STAP research to a heartbreak he experienced at university.

Tabloids were not the only outlets making such unsupported claims about Sasai. In June, an independent RIKEN reform committee, tasked with preventing future misconduct, released a report that criticized the CDB leaders, especially director Masatoshi Takeichi and Sasai, the deputy director, for being so motivated by the desire to eclipse the technology of induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cells — pioneered by another Japanese team in 2006 — that they skipped standard recruitment procedures when hiring Obokata.

The report also accused Sasai of orchestrating a media blitz that included making Obokata wear an apron given to her by her grandmother to a press conference. It also “surmised” that Sasai was motivated by the lure of grants in pursuing STAP.

Takeichi and Sasai objected to these points among numerous others in the report. The committee did not interview Sasai — nor anyone else at the CDB aside from Takeichi — before reaching conclusions about the motivations that drove Sasai. The report itself lacked an explanation for most of the accusations. Nonetheless, it recommended that the CDB be dismantled.

In June, in response to queries from a Nature reporter (Nature’s news team is editorially independent of its research editorial team) to various committee members, Masaki Nakamura of Osaka University forwarded a note from “the RIKEN reform committee”, of which he is a member, stating that the panel would not respond to requests in an attempt to “avoid any unnecessary confusions and/or misunderstanding”. The message also said that the committee had disbanded and thus no one could comment.

Underlying factors

Teruo Kishi, an emeritus professor at the University of Tokyo who led the reform committee, has, however, commented elsewhere in the Japanese press. In the wake of the suicide, Kishi said that Sasai’s death could have been avoided if RIKEN had acted more quickly on the committee's recommendations. “The key thing is speed,” he said. “By waiting, criticism in the mass media increases, and it has the opposite effect.”

According to Kazuhiro Nakamura’s summary of the underlying factors that led to the suicide, it was the committee’s recommendation to dismantle the CDB in June, not RIKEN’s slowness in doing so, that “gave Sasai a tremendous shock”.

Kishi says that he hopes that “the dismantlement of the CDB, through an even greater reform than the one recommended by the reform committee, would catapult RIKEN to a world-leading position”.

Developmental and stem-cell biologists think the CDB already occupies that position, leading to a flood of international support for the CDB since June. Maria Leptin, a molecular biologist and director of the European Molecular Biology Organization in Heidelberg, Germany, said at the time that the committee’s proposals for the CDB “may even be more damaging than the incident itself”.

While RIKEN continues to deliberate the CDB’s fate, many are still trying to come to grips with Sasai’s death — his family more than anyone. At the 12 August press conference, Kazuhiro Nakamura also released a statement from Sasai’s family: “We feel crushed by a deep sorrow. This last six months have been too long, and we too are worn out. We see nothing but despair.” The statement goes on to wish the CDB members all the best in returning to an environment in which they can do research. It ends with a plea for their privacy to be respected.


＊＊＊＊＊

笹井氏の自殺の原因は、マスコミの不当なバッシング報道、および改革委員会の不当な理研解体要求にあると明快に論じております。

岸輝雄の言う、理研の小保方処分が遅れたためだ、などという言い訳などまったく信用していないことは明らかです。

たしかにそのように読める。

理研は検証実験の中間報告まで来ていたし、小保方自身の再現実験も決まっていた。


これが成功してSTAP細胞ができれば一発逆転で小保方、笹井はノーベル賞だ。
見込みがあるなら研究者は自殺なんてしないでしょう。


赤崎先生の本読んでいたら「窒化ガリウムで絶対いける」と信じていたという。笹井が本当にSTAP細胞信じているならとことんやっただろう。小保方実験の成功を見届けるまで死のうとはしないでしょう。

貴方は英語も読めるようだし、分子生物学の素養もあるようだ。我々のような素人が集まる掲示板に攪乱情報流しても意味がないでしょう。悪いこと言わないから理研の調査委員会に疑義提出してごらんなさいよ。


必ず返信があるでしょう。

ＨＮ思うにとＨＮ自由は頭がおかしいので相手にしないように。

理論物理をやっている連中の数式は一般理系人にも何が何だかわからない。


同じように専門の分子生物学者のDNA解析は素人には結論部分しかわからない。結論として「スタップ細胞はES細胞由来である可能性が非常に高い」となっていれば大方の素人は「へえ～そんなものか」と考えるしかない。


あの膨大な理研調査委員会報告書に異議を唱えるのなら彼らと同じかそれ以上の学歴、知識、実験経験、関連文献の読破力がなければならない。


素人相手に盛んに疑問を呈する人の学歴、職歴、実験歴を明らかにして欲しいところだが・・・・・・・・そもそもこんなところで一般人に何かを一生懸命吹き込もうとしている時点でアウト。　専門的な教育を受けているなら相手も専門家を選ぶべき。

素人相手に目くらまし書いても・・・・・・・完全に時間の無駄。

スタップが出来て一発逆転なら理研の縮小など取りやめになり、さらに文科省より予算が付いて竹市、笹井の地位も磐石だ。



難しく考えないで常識ある大人として考えるなら・・・・・・・・・将来に希望がある人は自殺などしない・・・・・・・ということは分かるでしょう。


失恋、受験の失敗、不治の病、仕事の挫折など欝になる理由はいくらでもあるが一線を越えるのは余程のことだ。小保方が成功すれば全てハッピーではないか。理研も小保方、笹井、若山も「細胞生物学の常識を覆す」大発見したのだから。


研究の成功がちらとでも見えていれば研究者は自殺などしない。それが分からない人は自ら研究や実験などやったことのない人だ。笹井はバッシングで死ぬようなヤワじゃない。