Vancouver Researcher Falsified Data in Wound Treatment Study, Leaked Report Reveals

A leaked investigative report has revealed that a prominent University of British Columbia (UBC) plastic surgery professor falsified data to claim his patented skin treatment could heal chronic bed sores within weeks—a finding that was never disclosed to the public.

According to the 64-page report obtained by CBC News and the Investigative Journalism Foundation (IJF), Dr. Aziz Ghahary “abandoned his scholarly integrity” during a pilot study of Meshfill, a liquid skin substitute he developed. The March 2021 document, prepared by a UBC-appointed committee of three outside experts, details how Ghahary presented fabricated results, violated conflict of interest guidelines, and allegedly bullied another researcher.

“These false claims gave patients and funders false hope by falsely claiming that Meshfill had quickly healed chronic pressure ulcer wounds. He also potentially endangered the health of future human trial subjects when Dr. Ghahary falsely claimed that there had been no adverse effects during the pilot study,” the report states.

Contrary to Ghahary’s public claims of miraculous healing, investigators found that none of the pressure wounds in the study had actually healed, and some became infected. Jocelyn Maffin, associate director of service delivery for Spinal Cord Injury B.C., noted that if Meshfill had worked as claimed, it would have been “close to miraculous” for people with spinal cord injuries.

“Pressure injuries have the biggest impact on quality of life of any of the complications common to people with spinal cord injuries,” Maffin explained. Such wounds can lead to serious infection, death, uncomfortable positioning, isolation, and depression.

Ghahary left UBC shortly after the investigation concluded in 2021, ending a 16-year career at the university. However, no public announcement was made about the findings, and Ghahary has continued to serve on the scientific advisory board of a Canadian biomedical company and occasionally give interviews about his career.

UBC spokesperson Matthew Ramsey declined to confirm whether Ghahary was the subject of the investigation, citing privacy laws. “Privacy law prevents UBC from commenting on allegations of scholarly integrity you’ve raised related to Dr. Ghahary’s research at UBC,” Ramsey wrote in an email.

Tarek Elneweihi, Ghahary’s lawyer, said his now 83-year-old client “has nothing to hide” but is “legally bound by confidentiality obligations” that prevent him from responding to questions about the report. Meshfill never reached the Canadian market.

The lack of public disclosure about the investigation raises serious concerns for ethics experts. Leigh Turner, director of the Centre for Health Ethics at the University of California, Irvine, questioned why a redacted version of the report couldn’t be made public.

“When these investigative reports disappear from view and are never made public, there’s an important educational opportunity that just never takes place,” Turner said. “When plane crashes take place, we don’t think that the privacy of the pilot is so important that we’re never going to discuss why it took place.”

The investigation began in June 2019 after Dr. Anthony Papp, a plastic surgeon and principal investigator for the pilot study, filed a complaint. Papp had collaborated with Ghahary previously and told investigators he had tried for years to change Ghahary’s practices. In one email quoted in the report, Papp warned Ghahary about filing a complaint, writing, “Frankly, this is becoming unbearable. I keep pointing out the same concerns repetitively with absolutely no effect.”

Before the investigation, Ghahary was an acclaimed researcher earning $242,960 annually from UBC. He directed the Burn and Wound Healing Research Group, served on UBC’s clinical research ethics board, and held several patents on skin healing products. In 2017, he won first prize for Meshfill in a Dragons’ Den-style competition called the “Innovators’ Challenge.”

The pilot study was designed to test Meshfill on 12 spinal cord patients with pressure ulcer wounds. The research protocol stipulated that as patent holder, “Dr. Ghahary will have no involvement with patient recruitment or consenting as well as data collection and interpretation.”

However, the investigation found that Ghahary violated this protocol repeatedly. He contacted at least one potential patient directly, and when enough spinal cord patients couldn’t be found, the study was expanded to include surgical wounds. Throughout the trial, Ghahary and his lab members visited the clinic, spoke with patients, and recorded their own measurements—creating a second, unauthorized set of data that differed significantly from the official records.

“There’s supposed to be one set of data, and it’s data that Dr. Ghahary is not supposed to be playing a role in generating, because of his financial conflict of interest,” Turner explained.

A nurse involved in the study also told investigators that Ghahary pressured her to perform treatments beyond what was allowed in the protocol. She alleged that he cornered her in an office, saying, “Do you know how important this work is, how is it you don’t want to give up your time?” Ghahary denied this encounter occurred, but the panel accepted the nurse’s account.

The study’s results showed no “real change” in pressure ulcer wounds, according to Papp’s analysis. Yet Ghahary claimed in various public presentations that the trial had shown “significant improvement” and that some wounds “completely healed in four weeks.” He even posted a testimonial video featuring a patient with a surgical wound while giving the impression they had been treated for a pressure injury.

The pilot study was eventually suspended, and ethics approval for a follow-up study was revoked.

Emmanuelle Marceau, a professor at the University of Montreal’s school of public health, expressed disbelief at Ghahary’s actions. “How can you just falsify data?” she asked, noting that such misconduct damages public trust in science and healthcare. “It’s the trust, it’s the faith that the people put into science and the health system and the care they receive or the medication they take. When you have cases like that, it just shocks the whole [establishment].”