Lawyering-up Medicine Open Letter

Open Letter in support of my investigation of trachea transplants in Germany, by Rafael Cantera

Below a support letter by Rafael Cantera, professor of zoology at the University of Stockholm in Sweden, addressed to the leadership of the University Clinic Würzburg. This is because two professors of this German university, Thorsten Walles and Heike Mertsching (now Walles) chose to respond to my inquiries about their earlier trachea transplants made from pig intestine (see my detailed report here) with lawyers’ financial blackmail and right after, with court actions, which had me sentenced guilty with a  threat of a prison term of 6 months, without my prior knowledge (see case description here). Such are the peculiarities of German law: internet bloggers are basically  legally defined here by default as criminals, and professors as infallible and divine beings (in fact, even Walleses’ former boss and collaborator Paolo Macchiarini is still a protected adjunct professor at their former common place of work, the Medical University Hannover). I received lots of support from my readers, and was also invited to give an interview with the French magazine Mediapart (German version here). Now, I am deeply grateful to Prof. Cantera for his support, and hope other international and maybe even German academics join in and sign below. 

rcantera_about
Rafael Cantera, author of Open Letter below (source: Stockholm University)

A conspiracy of German institutions against freedom of information

The Walleses even admitted to their judge in Würzburg that they did receive my questions in advance, but chose not to reply to them. They instead even revealed to the court their immediate intentions to find out my private address and had me slapped with a costly court injunction and a threat of a prison term, from the very beginning. The judge however apparently saw my act of asking inconvenient questions alone as an act of blasphemy against German professors.  The only  evidence against me which this Würzburg regional court judge actually bothered to scrutinise was the Walleses’ academic employment situation and their current applications to new professorships. That “evidence” fully sufficed to declare me guilty of slanderous libel against two German professors, what I actually wrote about their trachea transplants on my site was utterly irrelevant in this context. It was enough that the Walleses did not like it.

While they and their pricey lawyer prepared this legal attack on basic freedoms of speech and press, their employers, the University of Würzburg and the Fraunhofer Institute for Interfacial Engineering and Biotechnology in Stuttgart, repeatedly refused to answer any of my questions regarding those 3 tracheal transplants, even when requested to do so under legally binding freedom of information law. Most recently, I asked the Fraunhofer institute to explain if any animal testing at all was performed before their researcher Heike Walles delivered in 2007 and 2009 pig-intestine-derived tracheal grafts which her husband then implanted into two patients. The internet biomedical portal PubMed suggests that to the very least, no animal experiments at all were published by the Walleses in this regard, before or after the method was initially first tested on a human patient together with Macchiarini in Hannover in 2004.

Update 23.01.2017: The Fraunhofer Institute admitted that no animal testing was deemed necessary prior to two patient transplants. Details here.

Instead answering my questions, the University Clinic of Würzburg allowed their two professors to use these affiliations to suggest that they were actually acting in court against me as representatives of the entire University Clinic. It went as far that both the University and the University Clinic Würzburg refused to even acknowledge receiving my administrative complaints about their two professors, never mind processing those. My freedom of information inquiries to the German Ministry of Education and Research and the medicinal product watchdog Paul-Ehrlich-Institut about the Walles’ ministry-funded clinical trial and about the approvals for their previous trachea transplants, are as yet unanswered, even after the legally binding time period of one month to deliver a reply has long expired. It is none of nosy public’s business if human experiments in German research institutions (with none of the affected patients being currently alive) were ever properly approved  or, if indeed these experiments actually still take place or are being prepared. The status of the aforementioned federally-funded multi-patient clinical trial with pig intestine-made trachea is confidential and not for us to know. If you want to speak of academic conspiracy in Germany, here is a big and a highly unsavoury one.

In fact, the Walles’ lawyer just sent me another threatening letter, demanding of me to accept the court injunction, pay his clients an unspecified compensation damage and him around €1800 lawyer’s fee.

csm_thorsten_und_heike_walles_a2f15ad681
Don’t you dare ask questions about their trachea transplants, or you’ll go to prison. These are two German professors and the law is on their side. Thorsten and Heike Walles, image source: University of Würzburg.

Open Letter in support of Schneider’s investigation of trachea transplants in Germany, by Rafael Cantera

Prof. Dr. med. Georg Ertl, Medical Director University Clinic Würzburg, Germany.

Prof. Dr. med. Matthias Frosch, Dean of Medical Faculty, University of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.

c/c Leonid Schneider

January 15, 2017

Dear colleagues,

For months I’ve been reading in the Swedish press as well as on Leonid Schneider’s blog For Better Science many notes about the scandalous trachea transplantations on human patients in which Dr. Paolo Macchiarini has been involved and for which he’s been, and is still investigated in Sweden. This was an extraordinary scandal for the Karolinska Institute and the Karolinska University Hospital; it has already resulted in several resignations and investigations, including a police investigation of Macchiarini himself. Fortunately, the Swedish authorities and academy adopted an open, self-critical and transparent reaction and in due process questions from journalists were answered, documents were made public, investigations were initiated and conclusions were reported to the public. For his fantastic journalistic investigation of this story  “of fraudulent research” that “revealed life-threatening ambition in the academic world” the Swedish journalist Bo Lindquist was awarded the Swedish Grand Prize for Journalism in 2016.

In spite of that, according to the Swedish press and academic colleagues of mine in Sweden and other countries this scandal might have negative, perhaps long-lasting consequences on the public trust and confidence in science and medicine and so, in my opinion, it deserves to be investigated to the last link and detail. If the public trust is to be restored, every trachea transplantation in which Macchiarini and his collaborators were directly or indirectly involved should be investigated and the results must be clearly and openly reported to the public. In doing so, which as a scientist I think is necessary and important, Leonid Schneider started to investigate the activities of the German professors Heike and Thorsten Walles, who were also involved in trachea transplantations and had professional links to Macchiarini and his activities (primarily: Macchiarini et al 2004 and Walles et al, 2004).

Now, after reading about the court trial in Bavaria against Leonid Schneider, I have the unpleasant feeling that it is perhaps the intent to punish him for his investigations and to avoid further investigations of possible misconduct in German universities regarding Macchiarini-related trachea transplantations. This feeling will be supported if it was correct, I as was told, that both research institutions involved, namely the Fraunhofer Society and the University of Würzburg refused to answer questions regarding the two experimental trachea transplants on human patients they performed and later on published (Mertsching et al 2009  and Steinke et al, 2015 ). Moreover, it appears that Professors Walles acted apparently with full approval of their academic employer by using their academic affiliations with the University Clinic Würzburg. The outcome was a court injunction passed in absentia against Leonid Schneider forbidding him to state facts which Professors Walles themselves had been repeating often and widely just some years ago in interviews, press releases, books and research publications.

Leonid Schneider can count with my support and I hope you will also help him in his important investigation, answering his questions and providing as much information as you can disclose.

Yours sincerely,

Rafael Cantera, PhD

Professor

Zoology Institute, Stockholm University

Stockholm, Sweden


Dear readers, If you wish to express your support as well, please comment with your full name and institutional affiliation below.

If you would like to support my court litigation financially, donation amount doesn’t matter, please go to my Patreon site or contact me

Donate!

If you are interested to support my work, you can leave here a small tip of $5. Or several of small tips, just increase the amount as you like (2x=€10; 5x=€25). Your generous patronage of my journalism will be most appreciated!

€5.00


Update 4.02.2017. The signatories of this letter have been subjected to an “alternative facts” campaign by Walles’ employee Jan Hansmann. Details here.

228 comments on “Open Letter in support of my investigation of trachea transplants in Germany, by Rafael Cantera

  1. Sujai Kumar's avatar

    I support Professor Cantera and Leonid Schneider, and I urge the Walles’ lawyer and the Bavarian court to stop this attack on science and reason.

    Sujai Kumar, PhD
    The University of Edinburgh

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Itumeleng's avatar

    I also fully support Professor Cantera’s letter and acknowledge the importance of Leonid Schneider in promoting transparency in science. Leonid Schneider deserves the right to defend himself, hopefully, these charges will be dropped. Nobody deserves to be punished for exposing such illicit and dubious ‘science’. Keep up the good work Leonid Schneider.

    Itumeleng Moroenyane
    Ph.D Candidate
    Institut National de la Recherche Scientifque
    Institut Armand-Frappier
    Laval, Quebec
    Canada

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Michele De Palma's avatar
    Michele De Palma

    In support of Leonid and the freedom of science journalism.

    Michele De Palma, PhD
    Assistant Professor
    School of Life Sciences
    Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL)

    Liked by 1 person

  4. William Cawthorn's avatar
    William Cawthorn

    I also fully support Professor Cantera’s letter. I am shocked that the trial against Leonid Schneider was conducted in his absence and that his requests for relevant information were denied, despite being made under legally binding freedom of information laws.

    Science seeks to advance our knowledge and understanding, but this goal will be derailed if we cannot act with transparency and integrity.

    Sincerely,

    William Cawthorn
    Chancellor’s Fellow and MRC Career Development Fellow
    University/BHF Centre for Cardiovascular Science
    The Queen’s Medical Research Institute
    The University of Edinburgh, UK
    Edinburgh, EH16 4TJ
    W.Cawthorn@ed.ac.uk
    Twitter: @MATscientists
    Web: Edinburgh Research Explorer

    Liked by 1 person

  5. Janet D. Stemwedel's avatar

    Science is only “self-correcting” if we allow members of the scientific community, and the broader public, the freedom to discuss theories, techniques, findings, and ethical implications. Legal attempts to chill such open discussion are a strike against the organized skepticism which is essential to good science.

    I cosign Prof. Cantera’s letter.

    Janet D. Stemwedel
    Department of Philosophy
    San Jose State University
    San Jose, California, USA

    Liked by 1 person

  6. Ruth Dixon's avatar

    I strongly support the letter of Professor Cantera and the freedom of Leonid Schneider to pursue his investigations without the threat of financial or legal penalties.

    Dr Ruth Dixon,
    Researcher, Blavatnik School of Government, University of Oxford, UK.

    Liked by 1 person

  7. Andre Marques Smith's avatar
    Andre Marques Smith

    I support Professor Cantera’s letter.

    Andre Marques-Smith, PhD
    King’s College London
    Centre for Developmental Neurobiology

    Liked by 1 person

  8. Joanna Williams's avatar
    Joanna Williams

    I fully support Leonid Schneider in his important investigation.
    Joanna Williams
    University of Kent

    Liked by 1 person

  9. Stephane Lemaire's avatar
    Stephane Lemaire

    I strongly support the open letter of professor Cantera.

    Dr Stephane Lemaire
    Directeur de recherche CNRS
    Institut de Biologie Physico-Chimique
    Paris
    France

    Liked by 1 person

  10. Leonid Schneider's avatar

    Prof Dorothy Bishop asked me to place this comment on her behalf:

    “It is remarkable that a University should have recourse to legal threats against a journalist who is requesting information.
    Such behaviour is likely to have the opposite effect from that intended, by drawing attention to the dispute and by damaging the reputation of the University.
    Dorothy Bishop”

    Professor of Developmental Neuropsychology
    Wellcome Trust Principal Research Fellow
    Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford
    Oxford, UK

    Like

  11. Professor James McInerney's avatar

    I have read the letter and would like to support the notion that all science should be open and questioned and scrutinised. To be against this scrutiny is to be against the idea of science – that it has a logical system of examining the world. No scientist is above scrutiny, nor should they wish to be.

    Prof. James McInerney PhD DSc FLS,
    Chair in Evolutionary Biology | Director, Evolution, Systems and Genomics,
    Joint Academic Lead, Women’s & Children’s MAHSC Domain,
    Division of Evolution and Genomic Sciences, School of Biological Sciences,
    Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health,
    The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre,
    Manchester M13 9PL, United Kingdom.

    Liked by 1 person

  12. Johannes Jäger's avatar
    Johannes Jäger

    I fully support Professor Cantera’s letter and Leonid Schneider’s excellent work covering the tracheal transplantation scandal. Good quality science requires transparency and critical investigation. The court case against Leonid Schneider frontally attacks both of these fundamental prerequisites, apart from seemingly violating the defendant’s basic rights to defend himself in court.

    Dr. Johannes Jäger
    Scientific Director
    Konrad Lorenz Institute for Evolution and Cognition Research (KLI)
    Klosterneuburg, Austria

    Liked by 1 person

  13. Paul Brookes's avatar

    Count me as a supporter of Dr Schneider. This is an abuse of the flawed German legal system, and in the US would be promptly dismissed by anti-SLAPP statutes present in many states.

    Paul Brookes,
    Professor of Anesthesiology,
    University of Rochester, NY, USA.

    Liked by 1 person

  14. Konrad Hinsen's avatar

    Critically questioning scientific findings and medical acts is part of the scientific method, and discussing this in public is a matter of freedom of speech. There I agree with Professor Cantera that Leonid Schneider’s investigations should not be blocked by a court trial.

    Konrad Hinsen
    Centre Biophysique Moléculaire
    Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS)
    Orléans, France

    Like

  15. Ionas Erb's avatar

    As a German having been working in research outside of Germany for many years, I am shocked by how this is handled by the German authorities. I hereby wish to express my support to Leonid Schneider.
    Ionas Erb
    Centre for Genomic Regulation (CRG),
    The Barcelona Institute of Science and Technology
    C\ Dr Aiguader, 88
    08003 Barcelona, Spain

    Liked by 1 person

  16. David Wasserman's avatar
    David Wasserman

    I strongly support Dr. Cantera’s initiative to denounce the violation of freedom of speak of Dr. Schneider.

    David Wasserman
    Professor of Molecular Physiology and Biophysics
    Vanderbilt University School of Medicine
    Nashville, TN 37232
    USA

    Liked by 1 person

  17. Jill Howlin's avatar

    Support

    Jill Howlin PhD

    Canceromics Branch
    Lund University Cancer Center/Medicon Village
    Building 404:B2
    Scheelevägen 2,
    SE-223 81 Lund
    Sweden
    Tel: +46-46-2221579/+46-709106498
    Web: http://www
    .med.lu.se/english/klinvetlund/canceromics/research

    Liked by 1 person

  18. Rubén Rellán-Álvarez (@rrellanalvarez)'s avatar

    Rubén Rellán Álvarez
    Assistant Professor
    National Laboratory of Genomics for Biodiversity
    Irapuato, GTO, México

    Liked by 1 person

  19. Nicolas P. Rougier's avatar
    Nicolas P. Rougier

    Nicolas P. Rougier, PhD
    Researcher in Computational Neuroscience
    Inria, France

    Like

  20. Federico Vaggi's avatar

    The right of scientists and journalists to critically investigate and examine research findings is absolutely fundamental for science to flourish and needs to be defended.

    I support Professor Cantera’s letter.

    Federico Vaggi, PhD
    Ecole Normale Supérieure / INRIA
    Paris, France

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a reply to Paul Brookes Cancel reply