What is wrong with
self-promoting truth?
Dear Scientists,
Please note that Nature has deleted my comment (posted with another name because all of my real name accounts in Nature were not working for some reasons) shown below:
Shi V. Liu MD PhD
---------------------------------
Dear Cool Hot,
The following post you wrote on the Nature News website has been hidden by the moderator in accordance with our terms and conditions.
Open Letter to iPS/Cancer Researchers:::::: Based on my
discovery of "induced pluripotent stem cells" (iPSCs) as incorrectly
programmed stem cells (iPSCs) or, in other words, man-made cancer stem cells (mmCSCs), I have invented a method "ANTI-TUMOR AGENTS
SCREEN USING IPCS" in which the term "iPCs"
is defined as incorrectly programmed cells to include iPSCs (incorrectly
programmed stem cells) and iPNSCs (incorrectly
programmed non-stem cells)./// Anticipating likely challenge that "induced
pluripotent stem cells" are not incorrectly programmed stem cells and are
even "cancer-free" I have withheld the filing of patent application
of the above invention until now when I saw "independent"
confirmations of my discovery coming out from around the world in some
"top" journals such as Nature Biotechnology's publication of
Yamanaka's "Variation in the safety of induced pluripotent stem cell
lines" (overloaded with oncogenes) and the recent same-day publication in
Nature of five research papers showing enhanced generation of iPSCs (by
knocking out tumor-suppressing mechanisms)./// Now, the publication of this
Cell paper just further strengthened the importance of my invention because, as
the authors of this Cell paper stated, "screens for agents that
specifically kill epithelial cancer stem cells (CSCs) have not been possible
due to the rarity of these cells within tumor cell populations and their
relative instability in culture"./// My invention will take advantage of a
rich set of incorrectly programmed stem cells (iPSCs) made to believe as
induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs). Compared with other natural CSCs, these
mmCSCs are all "immortalized" so they are
very stable. They are also relatively well characterized at least to the extent
that they can be distinguished now from embryonic stem cells (ESCs). So, mmCSCs disguised as "induced pluripotent stem
cells" (iPSCs) may be better vehicles for screening anti-tumor/anti-cancer
agents/drugs./// I have communicated my ideas with the corresponding authors
(three of them) and got a positive response already. Now I am writing this
Comment to serve as a PUBLIC APPEAL to iPS/cancer researchers to join me in
discovering anti-tumor/anti-cancer agents/drugs by using iPSCs as surrogates
for natural cancer stem cells. I am going to give the utility of my invention
free of charge to the first group who contacts me from the following countries
where iPSCs have been generated as far as I know:
Self-promotion.
-Nature News editors
---------
Shi V. Liu’s response:
If a scientist is not even allowed to speaking out truth he has found, what a scientist can do? If a scientific journal knew the truth but still cheat the world, is that journal still a scientific journal?