University of California (UC)’s
firm grip to about half of CIRM awards, total ~ $800 millions from Prop 71 and
¾ of these awards have nothing to do with Prop 71, would not be possible
without 12 of their Directors on CIRM board to represent their strong financial
conflicts of interest, including Duane Roth, CEO of UC connect; Shlomo Melmed, associate dean of UCLA
and director at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center; Robert Birgeneau, chancellor of UC Berkeley; Carmen Puliafito, dean of the Keck School
of Medicine; David Brenner, vice chancellor and dean of UCSD; Susan Bryant, vice chancellor of UCI; Sam Hawgood, dean and vice chancellor
of UCSF; Claire Pomeroy, vice chancellor of
UC Davis; Eugene Washington, vice
chancellor and dean of UCLA; Sherry
Lansing, a Regent and chair of UC; Francisco
Prieto, clinical professor at UC Davis; Oswald Steward, chair and director of UCI. UC’s strong financial
interest representation in CIRM board is in staring contrast to UC fictitious
stem cell programs/centers where human embryonic stem cell (hESC) research of Prop
71 virtually does not exist. So, without
a robust hESC research program, how did Larry Goldstein get ~ $30 million
awarded to himself from CIRM without having to do anything? With ~ $800
millions of taxpayers’ money that is enough to jump start many robust competitive
hESC research programs or Regenerative Medicine start-ups, why would UC shut
down hESC research labs (see below UC president Yudof’s excuse)? With mass
amount of empty research spaces to offer, why could not UC, the biggest
beneficiary of Prop 71, accommodate hESC research (see below UC president
Yudof’s excuse)?
CIRM has awarded $1.2 billion
out of 1.6 billion to those without Prop 71 scientific merits using a flawed
grant review process that has zero implementation
for Prop 71, even hostile to Prop 71 stem cell research. Who are selecting those
biased CIRM awards using their CIRM sponsored meetings & CIRM board conflict
of interest connections? What the public may not know is the despotic power of
those professors as stem cell program/center directors acting on their financial
conflicts of interest. As we know, Larry Goldstein had lots of talks about his
fictitious astrocytes for > $10M CIRM ALS award with virtually no results
[e.g., not even a single piece of data to show his cells express astrocyte
markers in his ~ 1 hr on stage talk at world stem cell summit, he admitted himself
publicly not working for ALS either]. And Larry Goldstein’s professional
associate Anjana Rao, an immunologist and impostor for other stem cell
scientists in San Diego UT, has cheated $Ms from CIRM with her fictitious stem
cell research just because of her close connection with Larry Goldstein. With
their tens of millions of financial benefits at stake, how likely do you think
Larry Goldstein’s meeting committee for Stem Cell Meeting on the Mesa (SCMOM) would
be able to perform any unbiased activities for scientific presentation? Both
Anjana Rao and Larry Goldstein have $ Ms of CIRM awards for their fictitious
stem cell research that has virtually no stem cell research results, no wander
SCMOM cannot accommodate hESC research advances (see below poster submission
for SCMOM). SCMOM’s hostile to hESC research is evident if check their invited
list selected not based on the sciences but based on financial conflicts of interests
with their senior organizers, committee members, directors, and close
professional associates, so meeting organizers’ and CIRM board members’ close
professional associates would be well accommodated for hundreds of millions of
awards.
Sanford
Consortium for Regenerative Medicine (SCFRM) is built with public stem cell
research fund and supposed to open to all stem cell researchers in San Diego,
open for collaboration, open for stem cell research advances. However, a year
after the grand opening of "collaboratory", it remains as their
senior directors’, such as Evan Snyder and Larry Goldstein, extended
definition/territory for their own labs for the sole benefit of their institutes’
financial interest. Inconsistent to their deceptive idol-like faces in public,
those directors’ un-collaborative behavior acting on their real financial
conflicts of interest is nothing unfamiliar. Did I hear that Jean Loring
claimed to sue Burnham officials if I would ever gain access to Burnham stem
cell center supported by NIH funding that I was a major contributor to get that
NIH center grant when I was at Burnham? Did I hear that Larry Goldstein claimed
that I was not allowed to use UCSD stem cell center when I was at UCSD? Did I
hear that Larry Goldstein used his despotic power as UCSD stem cell director to
send mass emails to UCSD chancellor, deans, faculty to threat anybody who would
give me a faculty position and lab spaces to allow me to administrate my NIH
grants on human embryonic stem cell research, while he claimed himself publicly
as a stem cell scientist, stem cell director, and supportor of hESC research?
Like
SCMOM, Vincent Chen is just another episode of such severe conflicts of
interest with those in power and abuses that power; either as director, mentor,
or senior collaborator. Looking back on my mentor research scientist career development award (NIH
K01 AG024496) in a field so controversial so money-driven, I would like to record
here those examples of conflicts of interest that I wish it would be otherwise,
Conflicts of interest example 1: PI’s senior mentor Dr. Jean Loring had her close friends in or connected to NIH grant review committee [e.g., Mahendra Rao, former NIA & Director of CRM in NIH] to put the critique in summary statement to have the PI to identify her as the specific senior mentor for her K01 award. Dr. Jean Loring had financial or other interest in Dr. Parsons’ research/application, as evidenced by that she was able to use her advantages in senior position and resources to claim credits, including authorship & grants, for PI’s stem cell research, and was promoted to Professor & Center Co-Director at Sanford Burnham Medical Research Institute (former Burnham Institute) and received ~ 3 millions stem cell center grant from NIH without having to put the PI on the center grant. In fact, Dr. Loring used her advantage senior position as professor & stem cell center co-director to exclude the PI from using NIH-funded stem cell center resource for her stem cell research. Dr. Jean Loring has never fulfilled any mentor responsibility as written in her mentor support letter to NIH, and has used her advantages in senior/director position and resources to prevent the PI from fulfilling the career goal of K01 award to become an independent investigator or assistant professor/faculty due to conflicts of interest.
Conflicts of interest example 2: PI’s senior mentor Dr. Evan Snyder has financial or other interest in Dr. Parsons’ research/application, as evidenced by that he was able to use his advantages in senior position and resources to claim credits for all PI’s stem cell research, and was promoted to Center Director at Sanford Burnham Medical Research Institute (former Burnham Institute) and received ~ 3 millions stem cell center grant from NIH without having to put the PI on the center grant. In fact, Dr. Evan Snyder has used his advantages in senior mentor/director position to claim credits, including authorship and grants, for PI’s stem cell research, such as multi-millions of CIRM and NIH grants, collaboration/contracts with other senior collaborators, alliance and consortium, and donations or sponsorship/partnership from foundations and big Pharms, on which he has never included the PI or he has never obtained any collaboration agreement or consent from the PI. Dr. Evan Snyder has never fulfilled any mentor responsibility as written in his mentor support letter to NIH, but has spent >$30,000 of PI’s K01 award for his own lab use (although he was not supposed to according to K01 contract). Dr. Evan Snyder has used his advantages in senior/director position and resources to prevent the PI from fulfilling the career goal of K01 awards to become an independent investigator or assistant professor/faculty due to conflicts of interest.
Conflicts of interest example 3: PI’s senior mentor Dr. Stuart Lipton has financial or other interest in Dr. Parsons’ research/application, as evidenced by that he was able to use his advantages in senior mentor/director position and resources to claim credits, including authorship and grants, for PI’s stem cell research, such as NIH center grants (e.g., Burnham NIH PD center) and multi-millions of CIRM grants, collaboration/contracts with other senior collaborators, alliance and consortium, and donations or sponsorship/partnership from foundations and big Pharms, on which he has never included the PI or he has never obtained any collaboration agreement or consent from the PI. In fact, Dr. Stuart Lipton has never fulfilled any mentor responsibility as written in his mentor support letter to NIH. Dr. Stuart Lipton has used his advantages in senior/director position and resources to prevent the PI from fulfilling the career goal of K01 awards to become an independent investigator or assistant professor/faculty due to conflicts of interest.
Conflicts of interest example 4: PI’s senior mentor Dr. Yang Xu has financial or other interest in Dr. Parsons’ research/application, as evidenced by that he was able to use his advantages in senior position and resources to claim credits for PI’s stem cell research, and was promoted to Professor at University of California at San Diego. In fact, Dr. Yang Xu, who lacks appropriate stem cell research expertise, has used his advantages in senior mentor position and resources to claim credits for PI’s stem cell research for multi-millions of CIRM grants, on which he has never included the PI or he has never obtained any collaboration agreement or consent from the PI. Dr. Yang Xu has never fulfilled any mentor responsibility as written in his mentor support letter to NIH, but has used his advantages in senior position and resources to prevent PI from getting promotion/faculty position & research/lab spaces in UCSD to administrate her NIH grants, and has spent ~ $50,000 of PI’s K01 award for his own lab use (although he was not supposed to according to K01 contract). Dr. Xu has used his advantages in senior position and resources to prevent the PI from fulfilling the career goal of K01 awards to become an independent investigator or assistant professor/faculty due to conflicts of interest.
Conflicts of interest example 5: PI’s senior mentor Dr. Prue Talbot, who lacks appropriate stem cell research expertise, has financial or other interest in Dr. Parsons’ research/application, as evidenced by that she was able to use her advantages in senior/director position and resources to claim credits for PI’s stem cell research to get multi-millions of CIRM grant funded as UCR stem cell director, on which she has never included the PI or she has never obtained collaboration agreement or consent from the PI. In fact, Dr. Prue Talbot has never fulfilled any mentor responsibility as written in her mentor support letter to NIH, but has involved in shutting down of PI’s hESC research lab at UCR and holding PI’s stem cells and research equipments in UCR without license agreement due to conflicts of interest. Dr. Talbot has used her advantages in senior/director position and resources to prevent the PI from fulfilling the career goal of K01 awards to become an independent investigator or assistant professor/faculty due to conflicts of interest.
Conflicts of interest example 2: PI’s senior mentor Dr. Evan Snyder has financial or other interest in Dr. Parsons’ research/application, as evidenced by that he was able to use his advantages in senior position and resources to claim credits for all PI’s stem cell research, and was promoted to Center Director at Sanford Burnham Medical Research Institute (former Burnham Institute) and received ~ 3 millions stem cell center grant from NIH without having to put the PI on the center grant. In fact, Dr. Evan Snyder has used his advantages in senior mentor/director position to claim credits, including authorship and grants, for PI’s stem cell research, such as multi-millions of CIRM and NIH grants, collaboration/contracts with other senior collaborators, alliance and consortium, and donations or sponsorship/partnership from foundations and big Pharms, on which he has never included the PI or he has never obtained any collaboration agreement or consent from the PI. Dr. Evan Snyder has never fulfilled any mentor responsibility as written in his mentor support letter to NIH, but has spent >$30,000 of PI’s K01 award for his own lab use (although he was not supposed to according to K01 contract). Dr. Evan Snyder has used his advantages in senior/director position and resources to prevent the PI from fulfilling the career goal of K01 awards to become an independent investigator or assistant professor/faculty due to conflicts of interest.
Conflicts of interest example 3: PI’s senior mentor Dr. Stuart Lipton has financial or other interest in Dr. Parsons’ research/application, as evidenced by that he was able to use his advantages in senior mentor/director position and resources to claim credits, including authorship and grants, for PI’s stem cell research, such as NIH center grants (e.g., Burnham NIH PD center) and multi-millions of CIRM grants, collaboration/contracts with other senior collaborators, alliance and consortium, and donations or sponsorship/partnership from foundations and big Pharms, on which he has never included the PI or he has never obtained any collaboration agreement or consent from the PI. In fact, Dr. Stuart Lipton has never fulfilled any mentor responsibility as written in his mentor support letter to NIH. Dr. Stuart Lipton has used his advantages in senior/director position and resources to prevent the PI from fulfilling the career goal of K01 awards to become an independent investigator or assistant professor/faculty due to conflicts of interest.
Conflicts of interest example 4: PI’s senior mentor Dr. Yang Xu has financial or other interest in Dr. Parsons’ research/application, as evidenced by that he was able to use his advantages in senior position and resources to claim credits for PI’s stem cell research, and was promoted to Professor at University of California at San Diego. In fact, Dr. Yang Xu, who lacks appropriate stem cell research expertise, has used his advantages in senior mentor position and resources to claim credits for PI’s stem cell research for multi-millions of CIRM grants, on which he has never included the PI or he has never obtained any collaboration agreement or consent from the PI. Dr. Yang Xu has never fulfilled any mentor responsibility as written in his mentor support letter to NIH, but has used his advantages in senior position and resources to prevent PI from getting promotion/faculty position & research/lab spaces in UCSD to administrate her NIH grants, and has spent ~ $50,000 of PI’s K01 award for his own lab use (although he was not supposed to according to K01 contract). Dr. Xu has used his advantages in senior position and resources to prevent the PI from fulfilling the career goal of K01 awards to become an independent investigator or assistant professor/faculty due to conflicts of interest.
Conflicts of interest example 5: PI’s senior mentor Dr. Prue Talbot, who lacks appropriate stem cell research expertise, has financial or other interest in Dr. Parsons’ research/application, as evidenced by that she was able to use her advantages in senior/director position and resources to claim credits for PI’s stem cell research to get multi-millions of CIRM grant funded as UCR stem cell director, on which she has never included the PI or she has never obtained collaboration agreement or consent from the PI. In fact, Dr. Prue Talbot has never fulfilled any mentor responsibility as written in her mentor support letter to NIH, but has involved in shutting down of PI’s hESC research lab at UCR and holding PI’s stem cells and research equipments in UCR without license agreement due to conflicts of interest. Dr. Talbot has used her advantages in senior/director position and resources to prevent the PI from fulfilling the career goal of K01 awards to become an independent investigator or assistant professor/faculty due to conflicts of interest.
