Re i forgot

Subject: Re: lforgot

From: Harold Garner 
Date: 1/26/20, 12:31 PM

To: Brad Racino 

I will do a more thorough review and generate a shon report in the next day or so. I have
read and compared the material and there are clearly large sections of the Murphy IRB
that are identical or nearly identical, such that if not given permission and since there
appears to be no attribution to Taghva, this is what would be considered by scientific
professionals to be plagiarized material. The sections are so very large, it impossible by
chance for them to have accidentally been so similar. Since this is not in a publication, but
what should be confidential documents between Murphy and the school, it is up to UCSD
if they desire to do something. Also, the graphs in Murphy are very similar, but not
identical to Tafi'iva, they may have been redrawn and, to would be considered plagiarized.
Alternatively, if Murphy cannot produce laboratory notebooks from whence the data came,
it would be considered fabricated or falsified data, say by an ethics review board at UCSD.

Generally, if problems like plagiarized or falsified data are discovered, the IRB would
immediately recend permission to continue the study. If the study is over, then data
generated in said study would be considered unreliable, again something that an IRB
board at UCSD would have to determine, and decide what to do.

Dr. Harold "Skip" Gamer

Associate Vice-Provost for Research Development,

Executive Director, Primary Care Research Network and the Center for Bioinformatics and
Genetics, Edward \fia College of Osteopathic Medicine (VCOM)

Professor of Biomedicine, VCOM

CSO, Orbit Genomics, Heliotext, Quanta Lingua and Comperity

 

tut}

I/zx/zu 2.40 PM

RC I for a

 

Re: I forgot

-BRAD RACINO   Senior Reporter & Assistant Director
inewsource.org
c. (845) 553-4170
t. @bradracino
P.S. We want to hear from you! Take a brief survey to help us get to know you and the
topics you want us to look into.

3 of 3

1/28/20, 2:40 PM