Stay Curious. Stay Connected.
MailNewsletters♡Donate Now
Sign up
*Password must be at least 8 characters and contain one uppercase letter, one lowercase letter, one number and one symbol.
Already have an account?
By submitting, you consent that you are at least 18 years of age and to receive information about MPR's or APMG entities' programs and offerings. The personally identifying information you provide will not be sold, shared, or used for purposes other than to communicate with you about MPR, APMG entities, and its sponsors. You may opt-out at any time clicking the unsubscribe link at the bottom of any email communication. View our Privacy Policy.
Sign in to your profile
Forgot Password?
New to MPR News?
Welcome back
to news
for you
Reset Password

Enter the username on file and we'll send you a code to reset your password.

Still require assistance or not sure what your User Name is?
Welcome back
to news
for you
Email Verification

A verification code has been emailed to

Still awaiting the code?
On Campus Blog
Alex Friedrich

A look at competing claims over Markingson reviews

Go Deeper.

Create an account or log in to save stories.

Log inCreate a free Account

Like this?

Thanks for liking this story! We have added it to a list of your favorite stories.

Show me!

The recent campus vigil and remarks by former Gov. Arne Carlson over investigations into the 2004 death of University of Minnesota research patient Dan Markingson have dredged up a long-running question about the case:

Has it ever been adequately investigated?

The U has stated repeatedly that it has. When asked to lay out its case, a spokesman sent me this.

'>

Critics such as U of M bioethics professor Carl Elliott say that's not an accurate portrayal.

He points to a November analysis by Trudo Lemmens and Shannon Gibson of the University of Toronto of the reviews. It says they suffer from a number of insufficiencies:

'>