A highly-regarded medical journal has decided to retract a 2016 study after serious concerns were raised that the data for the paper may have involved organs sourced from executed prisoners of conscience in China.
The journal, called Liver International, had published the scientific paper by Chinese surgeons on the safety of liver transplantation.
It also examined the outcomes of 563 operations at Zhejiang University’s First Affiliated hospital in China between 2010 and 2014.
Sydney-based clinical ethicist Wendy Rogers of Macquarie University said she sent a letter to the editor of the journal in January, calling for the paper’s retraction in the “absence of credible evidence of ethical sourcing of organs.”
She alleged that most liver transplants in the study were likely procured from executed prisoners of conscience.
She told dpa Friday that it would have been impossible to conduct such a big study without organs from prisoners being used, arguing that one hospital could not obtain so many usable livers in a four-year period from cardiac deaths alone.
Mario Mondelli, the journal’s editor-in-chief, said that following Rogers’ allegations, the editors had determined that the burden of proof rested on the authors to demonstrate the ethical sourcing of organs used in the research.
He told dpa the authors were asked to provide formal evidence by Feb. 3, via their institution, that the sourcing of organs was not from executed prisoners.
“Unfortunately, the institution did not wish to reply or comment, despite reminders,” Mondelli said.
The editors of the journal decided to retract the study inspite of two of the authors of the study saying that “all organs were procured from donors after cardiac death and no allografts (organs and tissue) obtained from executed prisoners were used.”
Mondelli said that an editorial retraction is now set to be published online, together with the retracted study. Each page of the report will be watermarked with the word “RETRACTED” however.
“All related correspondence will be published in the same issue,” Mondelli said.
The disputed study examined consecutive liver transplantations before the government explicitly banned, in 2015, the practice of using organs from executed prisoners and set up a volunteer donation system.
But scientists and activists say the practice of organ harvesting continues to persist in China in order to meet an overwhelming demand.
Earlier this week, at a Vatican summit on organ trafficking hosted by The Pontifical Academy of Sciences, Huang Jiefu, said the country may still be using organs from executed prisoners in some cases, though officially there is zero tolerance for such practice.
Huang is an official in charge of overhauling China’s organ transplant network,
Wendy Rogers said the organs usually come not just from prisoners sentenced to death but also from prisoners of conscience, who are jailed for beliefs outlawed by the government, like Falun Gong practitioners, a Buddhist-style spiritual movement.
“Organ harvesting is extremely profitable and the system is so engrained it’s impossible to stop it,” she said.
The practice is profitable for individuals, as well as hospitals and prisons, Rogers said.
In 2016, a study by the International Coalition to End Organ Pillaging in China found that the number of transplants reported by hospitals differed to the official transplant figures from the Chinese government by tens of thousands.
The European parliament in July passed a declaration condemning organ harvesting from prisoners of conscience and asked China to end it.(dpa/NAN)
