Henk Buck, a Dutch chemist who once claimed he could cure AIDS, is back, publishing a long explanation of why he was right all along in a journal by what Jeffrey Beall calls a possible predatory publisher.
Buck spent a few months in 1990 as a hero. In April of that year, he and his team published a paper in Science that claimed they could prevent HIV from infecting human cells. Buck went on a press blitz, appearing on TV and the radio claiming that there would be a treatment for AIDS “in a few years,” according to an 1991 comment published in Science.
Like many things that sound too good to be true, the AIDS cure was a fraud. Four separate investigations turned up faked data, manipulated images, and highly selective reporting designed to obscure the fact that HIV-fighting molecules never existed.
In September 1990, Buck was fired from Eindhoven Technical University. His co-author, Jaap Goudsmit at University of Amsterdam, was found to use misleading figures and data reporting, but was not officially censured.
The paper touting their miraculous finding was retracted in October 1990. Here’s an excerpt of the notice:
In view of the composition of the samples, we now believe that our hybridization studies of the longer (more than nine nucleotides) phosphare-methylated DNA oligomers with complementary natural DNA…do not warrent the interpretation given in our report. There is no evidence to suggest that the observed antiviral effects should be ascribed to the phosphate methylation of natural DNA.
Twenty five years later, Buck has published a rebuttal in Scientific Research Publishing’s Journal of Biophysical Chemistry.
Here’s the abstract for “Retracted HIV Study Provides New Information about the Status of the in Vitro Inhibition of DNA Replication by Backbone Methylation”:
In this publication attention is given to a retracted article in Science at the end of 1990 concerning the HIV-1 inhibition by a modified backbone DNA as the phosphatemethylated DNA. A disproportion in the presented data resulted in a faulty generalization of the (bio)chemical characteristics of the phosphatemethylated DNA (18- and 20-nucleotides). In the confusion and the outside pressure a related study in Nucleic Acids Research on the in vitro dynamics of a regiospecific inhibition of DNA duplication with long (20- and 18-nucleotides) and short (8-nucleotides) phosphatemethy- lated DNA was completely ignored. A restoration will be given based on a comprehensive view demonstrating the unique molecular and conformational properties of phosphatemethylated DNA in their (bio)chemistry towards natural DNA and RNA (HIV-1 RNA loops).
Henk concludes:
Taking into account the contradictions in the experimental data and their corresponding interpretations, a disqualification of the scientific research with phosphatemethylated DNA and its corresponding abrupt ending [1] [8] [10] [18] cannot be regarded as credible or trustworthy.
We’ve emailed Buck and the publisher, and will let you know if we hear back.
Comment on ”After 25 years, AIDS fraud comes back swinging”
sent on Wed, 17 May 2017.
On January 30, 2015 Cat Ferguson, reporter for Retraction Watch, informed me by email that she read my article in Journal of Biophysical Chemistry on DNA replication (Henk M. Buck, Emeritus Professor of the University of Technology Eindhoven): “I’m curious why you chose to publish this now – have you done further research in this area? Can you tell me why you think the paper was retracted initially?” For clarification the title of the Journal of Biophysical Chemistry is: Retracted HIV study provides new information about the status of the in vitro inhibition of DNA replication by backbone methylation. Vol 6; pp.29-34, 2015 and the Science article is: Phosphate-methylated DNA aimed at HIV-1 RNA loops and integrated DNA inhibits viral infectivity.Vol.248, pp.208-212, 1990.
My answer was sent to her on February 1, 2015, summarized as “I hope you can understand that your questions ask me to cover a period of 25 years.” On the same day she published her article in Retraction Watch as After 25 years, AIDS fraud comes back swinging, mainly based on an article in Science of March 22, 1991 written by Felix Eijgenraam, science writer NRC Handelsblad Rotterdam who deceased in 1994.
At first , I decided to give no reaction on the factual inaccuracies partly based on the Science text of Eijgenraam (abstracted from the two reports of the University of Technology Eindhoven). These committee members considered themselves not competent to judge the scientific value. Despite their marginal scientific view, they considered the NMR spectrum in Science as “certainly bordered on fraud.” I’m not questioned about this deadly conclusion. I left the university with honorable discharge.
I was shocked on Cat Fergusons follow-up: “Like many things that sound too good to be true, the AIDS cure was a fraud. Four separate investigations turned up faked data, manipulated images, and highly selective reporting designed to obscure the fact that HIV-fighting molecules never existed. In September 1990, Buck was fired from Eindhoven Technical University.” I consider this still as a pertinent lie. Moreover, the quality of the article in Journal of Biophysical Chemistry was considered as dubious, because it is a journal which Jeffrey calls a possible predatory publisher, thus questioning the reliability of my contribution. For a long period from 1999-2015, I published corresponding articles in Nucleosides Nucleotides Nucleic Acids. A reaction on the article of Eijgenraam was rejected by Science. However, an elaborated explanation for the fraudulent spectrum would be acceptable for publishing in Science when the authors agreed with the text. To date I have heard nothing (text with Figures are available; sent to prof.dr. Bloom on January 21, 1998). A short comment is also given in Nucleosides Nucleotides Nucleic Acids Vol.23, pp.1833-1847, 2004 on page 1841 ended with “ It clearly demonstrates that the presented NMR analysis differs completely from the explanation given in the public report of the university as quoted in Ref.[39]. ”
The NMR spectrum of the phosphate-methylated DNA 18-mer with the selected tRNA Phe was of vital importance as model for the hybridization with the four selected HIV-1 regions TAR, PBS, NEF, and VIF because we knew that the stability of the phosphate-methylated DNA with RNA is significantly less in comparison with natural DNA. This aspect has been published in various papers and quoted in Science. Phosphate-methylated DNA has a fixed B-conformation and natural RNA an A-conformation. For the inhibition of the (virus) RNA, phosphate-methylated RNA is the candidate. We already prepared a number of phosphate-methylated RNA dimers which demonstrate their affinity towards natural RNA. Unfortunately, further (virological) experiments were stopped after my sudden departure.
From the beginning Jaap Goudsmit responsible for the virological experiments, was described as a victim, so he became the principal author for the Retraction (Press release of the AMC Amsterdam, August 30 1990).
Two of my former employees selected by Goudsmit (without any control of an independent expert in the field) performed high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) on the samples.
Information needed for the NMR spectrum in Science became available after the Retraction by analysis of all the NMR spectra given by the Department of Organic Chemistry. I could conclude that the conscious NMR spectrum was manipulated. My findings were accepted by the Journal of the Proc. Kon. Ned. Akad. v. Wetensch., December 20, 1993, communicated at the meeting of Arts and Sciences on January 27, and February 24, 1992 : The (Bio)chemical properties of phosphate-methylated DNA (Part I and II).
At the same time the general secretary of the Academy and editor of the Proc. Kon. Ned. Akad. v. Wetensch. mentioned in a broadcast program of NOVA (TV News program 1992-2010) that Buck has done sterling work, is considered as one of the best organic chemists in the world and that his work on the field of HIV inhibition is based on a valuable idea that should be further developed. Thereafter the entire issue was withdrawn because of my critical view on the fraudulent NMR-spectrum of one of my postdocs in spite of the fact that the editor was informed about my views. This aspect was brought as big news by the KNAW.
The research of Goudsmit was beyond discussion. In the Retraction his contribution was not retracted. However, a couple of months later a very negative report of the AMC concerning his scientific contribution appeared.
A detailed report of my findings was sent to the KNAW (May 19, 2008) and The Netherlands Board on Research Integrity (October 1, 2008 LOWI, Landelijk Overleg Wetenschappelijke Integriteit). Both reports were not taken under consideration.
Finally, I asked the National ombudsman on June 28, 2010 for an examination of both reports. In his conclusion on February 3, 2011 in a public report he concluded that the Academy had not acted correctly to the applicant. The conduct was improper.
The president at that time of the KNAW, Robert Dijkgraaf (Princeton) did not adopt the recommendation of the report of the National ombudsman.
I hope you will give attention to my email in order to promote a fair judgment of my work on these modified DNAs and RNAs under biophysical conditions after 27 years .
With my best regards,
Henk M. Buck, Professor Emeritus Eindhoven University of Technology