Retraction Watch

Tracking retractions as a window into the scientific process

Missouri medical board reprimands Anil Potti

with 3 comments

Anil Potti, the former Duke oncology researcher who has now retracted ten papers amid continuing investigations into his work, has been reprimanded by the Missouri medical board.

The reprimand, which was first reported by DukeCheck, became effective on March 6. In it, the Missouri State Board of Registration for the Healing Arts noted that the North Carolina medical board had reprimanded Potti in November after he had

committed unprofessional conduct in that he had inaccuracies in his curriculum vitae and there were questions raised about possible misconduct involving his research work

Potti, who recently left a South Carolina oncology practice following a 60 Minutes investigation into his work, obtained his Missouri license on February 1, 2011. He continues to hold licenses in North Carolina and South Carolina. There was recently some short-lived confusion in the latter over the status of his ability to practice medicine because of a clerical error. He allowed a Minnesota license to expire in 2008.

Written by Ivan Oransky

March 10th, 2012 at 10:15 am

Comments
  • puzzled monkey March 10, 2012 at 11:42 am

    Since the state medical boards have jurisdiction over Dr Potti’s medical practice, they are “where the rubber hits the road” and are supposed to watch his practice, his advertising, AND his research closely… In real life, state boards vary widely in their level of oversight, their standards for initiating investigations, and their level of punitive action. There is no federal consistency after one passes all three parts of the National Boards examinations. The third exam, in a way, evaluates one’s competence and performance, and particularly one’s staying power, after internship; the only general exam after that is by the specialty society.

    I would give some juicy examples, but this isn’t a medical blog…see my personal blog post, “The Short Happy Life of Dr S.”

    All of this comes under the heading of “state’s rights”, applied to an extreme over licensing standards.
    Although some states might appear to have lax or primitive procedures due to its rural nature (and extreme doctor shortages) it does not take lightly an adverse action by a brother board.
    Thus, although Missouri’s action against Potti might seem irrelevant since he’s not there, it is actually automatic and closes off the doctor’s options (unless he wants to work in a severe shortage area or go back to India, which seems unlikely given his degree of self-regard.)

  • Post a comment

    Threaded commenting powered by interconnect/it code.