Ensuring Research Ethics
How U-M’s Dr. Mark Chiang prioritizes ethics in his research
—By Kailey Lashbrook
Every Friday at 9 AM, members of Dr. Mark Chiang’s lab gather in the third-floor conference room and share their research findings for the week. Brief presentations are prepared and presented on a large monitor in the middle of the room. Dr. Chiang listens carefully and asks questions about the logistics, results, and future directions of each experiment presented. He reviews each figure meticulously while typing detailed notes into his laptop. Every lab member, including undergrads, are encouraged to present.
On one Friday, one member was noticeably excited to present. Their experiment had shown promising results, and they were eager to hear feedback on what the next steps should be. However, another lab member was not as enthusiastic. Her experiment wasn’t successful, despite working on it for weeks. Yet, Dr. Chiang addressed both members with the same intrigue and appreciation. While Dr. Chiang is motivated to make meaningful scientific discoveries, he is also dedicated to ethical experimentation, which includes acknowledging that not all experiments work.
Dr. Chiang completed his MD/PhD and hematology/oncology fellowship at the University of Pennsylvania. In 2010, Dr. Chiang joined the hematology/oncology division at the University of Michigan. Currently, he serves as the principal investigator for a Michigan Medicine lab while teaching medical students and actively caring for patients with blood disorders. Specifically, the Chiang lab studies how to target specific elements of DNA that can lead to the formation of and proliferation of T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (T-ALL), a form of blood cancer that is most common in children.
Having been involved in research since he was an undergrad, Dr. Chiang understands the importance of ethical research. For him, ethics play a crucial role in the design, execution, and documentation of experiments in his lab.
Ethics of experimental design
During his experiments, Dr. Chiang and his lab members inject mice with cancer cells, which eventually leads to the mouse developing cancer itself. Dr. Chiang understands there are differing public opinions when it comes to using animals. He notes, “A majority of people would support animal research. We have learned that public opinion does not like human research through studies like Tuskegee [where Black patients with syphilis were left untreated]. But there are regulations in place. The Association for Assessment and Accreditation of Laboratory Animal Care (AAALAC) inspects facilities and ensures that the animals that are being experimented on are treated humanely, and only used when in vitro models cannot be used.” Yet, Dr. Chiang concludes, “Ethics is always changing, we just have to hope it’s for the better.”
In his lab, Dr. Chiang utilizes “power calculations” to “see how many mice are actually needed.” This ensures that his lab are not over-breeding mice, just to not need them, and have to euthanize them. Furthermore, the Chiang lab uses a white-blood-cell marker to monitor the mice. This is so “we can euthanize the mice as soon as they are infected, so they don’t have to suffer.” Dr. Chiang has repeatedly revised his procedures to ensure he is in accordance with the Unit for Laboratory Animal Medicine (ULAM) and to minimize the suffering of the mice. ULAM is a UMich program that ensures laboratory animals receive proper housing, nutrition, exercise, and healthcare.
Additionally, Dr. Chiang described the design of his experiments in a broader context: “I do research that would improve public health. There are some researchers who do gain-of-function research that would make viruses worse. They’re studying bad actors, it’s an area of controversy.” Recently, in 2019, Science magazine reported that the US government had resumed funding for experiments that could increase the transmission of bird flu. While proponents of this research argue it could help scientists better anticipate deadly diseases, others assert it is simply not worth risking another pandemic. Furthermore, Dr. Chiang says, “I want people of all races and sexes to benefit from my research. These are the stakeholders, and the taxpayers who provide funding. So, I ensure that I use both male and female mice.” While mice are useful for performing in vivo (in living things) experiments, Dr. Chiang also relies on human tissue samples. These samples have been “completely deidentified to protect the patient’s privacy.” He notes “we use anonymous tissues because we don’t want to trace anything we discover to a specific person.” This serves as an ethical boundary to protect the people these tissues are extracted from.
Another important ethical consideration for Dr. Chiang is ensuring that his lab members remain safe in the lab. His research involves the use of viruses to transduce and infect cells. However, these viruses are designed to infect human cells, which puts the members of his lab at a risk. Yet, Dr. Chiang notes, “We have designed these viruses to integrate once, and then stop, so they can’t jump into you.” In addition to this safeguard, the members of his lab always follow biosafety level 2 procedures which includes the use of lab coats, gloves and goggles, ventilated biosafety cabinets, and sterilization procedures.
“Publish or perish”
There is remarkable pressure for scholars to publish papers. Frequent publication is not only seen as a way to build a reputation in the scientific community, but also to secure funding. Dr. Chiang points out, “The only way to survive is grant support, and you need papers to get support.” As the principal investigator, there is an immense pressure to design, execute, and publish high-quality experiments and papers. Dr. Chiang, and his colleagues are not isolated from this stress. He notes, “Some people might feel the pressure to falsify or cherry-pick data, especially if funding is tight…but I feel like you do more harm. People might follow up on your research; you waste time, taxpayer money, and could potentially harm human patients.” He further discussed the irreversible damage that publishing false data can do to one’s reputation: “People don’t trust you anymore.”
While Dr. Chiang knows the risks of falsifying, he is reminded that others succumb to the pressure. For instance, in 2023 it was discovered that Dr. Chung Owyang published four studies that contained falsified data. This cost over $5 million in grants and interfered with seventy-five projects that cited his papers. Dr. Chiang also retells a story that happened in the lab of one of his colleagues. “There was a postdoc student who essentially had a panic attack because their experiments kept failing. The PI put a camera in the lab and it turns out that another grad student was killing their cells with 70% ethanol.” The consequences to this behavior are often severe, with perpetrators “losing grants and possibly having to leave the university.” Dr. Chiang, who frequently collaborates with other groups, adds, “overlapping projects protects against falsification because everyone would have to be colluding with you.” As an additional safeguard, he explains that he “periodically looks in his lab members’ notebooks.” While this is “sometimes a source of tension, as they might feel as if I don’t trust them,” it is his responsibility to make sure everyone is held accountable in the case of an audit.
Dr. Chiang employs many safeguards of his own to help ensure each experiment performed in his lab is ethical, reproducible, and well-documented.. However, for researchers at all levels, the pressure to produce successful experiments, and publish papers remains. Indeed, it could be argued that this pressure begins as an undergraduate. Frequently, undergraduates are graded on the success of their experiments and their ability to report their findings. One UMich undergrad, “Micheal,” confided, “Yes I have fabricated my data. I felt like there was no other option. My experiment failed and I didn’t want to get a bad grade so I faked my data.” Fear of bad grades can push undergraduate students to steal data or fabricate it entirely. As graduate students, this pressure is amplified as some universities require publications for graduation. Certain surveys have found that more than 85% of graduate students feel under pressure to publish, and feel like they need to outperform their classmates to succeed.
A note of advice
Dr. Chiang offered a final piece of advice: “We know what happens to people who falsify data, you will only end up hurting yourself.” Through his experience as a researcher, Dr. Chiang is certainly no stranger to scholarly pressure and a desire to succeed. But, he has learned the values of ethics both as it relates to experimental design and how research is presented. His commitment to accountability and willingness to appreciate an unsuccessful experiment during his morning lab meetings serves as a poignant reminder of the significance of transparency in scientific research.
Featured Photo by National Cancer Institute on Unsplash