[Memorandum Opinion and Order, Peter Lurie, plaintiff v. Department of the Army, defendant]

In their memorandum, the authors set forth in detail their evidence of "potential
scientific misconduct." That evidence included:
Overselling the GP160 phase I data may date back as early as
the New England Journal of Medicine publication (N Engl J
Med 1991: 324:1677-84). Oral presentations of the phase I
continuation data over the last year and a half have repeatedly
shown only a few selected "home run" patients. The data
from the entire study group has not been well represented by
these selected patients. Data analysis has been either sloppy
or, possibly, deceptive with use of inappropriately chosen
"control" groups, unorthodox statistical methods that abuse
the data to come up with the desired CD4 trend conclusions,
failure to include appropriately performed analyses that fail to
support the desired conclusion and badgering of statisticians
and colleagues by Dr. Redfield, sometimes successfully, to
agree to data analyses against their better professional
judgment.
Id. 3.
Dr. Redfield's professional peers sought specific action from Col. Burke:
Accordingly, we insist that further action be taken
immediately to: (1) publicly correct the record in a medium
suitable for widespread dissemination to our civilian scientific
colleagues, (2) censure Dr. Redfield for potential scientific
misconduct which should at least include temporarily
suspending his involvement on the current immunotherapy
protocols, and (3) initiate an investigation by a fully
independent outside investigative body, such as the Office of
Scientific Integrity of the N.I.H. to evaluate the facts of the
case and recommend appropriate actions.
Id 4.
They also raised their "serious concern" regarding Lt.Col. Redfield's connection to
a non-profit organization called "Americans for a Sound AIDS Policy" or "ASAP," which

10