Last calendar month , Gallic scientists let go a wide - celebrated study prove they had partiallyrestored consciousness in a manwho had drop half of his sprightliness in a vegetal land . While the rest of the world assumed he was alive , it ’s now been revealed that the humans actually break months before their report was bring out .
However , the study did not mention that the gentleman had died in June 2017 . His dying was only publically admitted last week during an interview in the French newspaperLe Parisien , where researcher Professor Marc Guenot claim his death was not connected to the treatment .
“ Unfortunately , this man died this year , a pulmonary knottiness , ” Professor Guenot state Le Parisienlast week . “ This has strictly no connection with electrical stimulation . ”
When asked if he was concerned with fostering off-key hope for home in this state of affairs , Professor Guenot responded : “ There is no question of that . And the family of this 35 - yr - old man was warn … The wit injury of these patients are irreversible . ”
The researchers also gave program line to the press which suggested the man was still alive . Lead researcherAngela Sirigu toldThe Guardianin September : “ He is still paralyzed , he can not speak , but he can react . Now he is more cognisant . ”Although , since most of the scientist on the project are French , it ’s only possible their statement were lose in transformation .
Nevertheless , their failure to unwrap the information has aroused questions about transparentness and ethics in science . The researchers claim they made the conclusion to not reveal the decease out of esteem to the world ’s family , as well as concerns that people might have wrongly blamed the therapy for his death .
Professor Jacques Luauté of the University of Lyon , another researcher from the study , toldLe Monde : “ We had discuss it with the family . Together , we incorrectly thought that this would direct to hoi polloi making a link between the input and the end . We conclude that the destruction – unrelated to experimentation – was a private family outcome . "
" This was a mistake because it was obvious that we ’d been asked what had become of the patient . ”
