The chief of the U.S. National Institutes of Health this week formally acknowledged that some researchers feel the agency has unfairly targeted Asian and Asian American scientists, particularly those of Chinese descent, during a 6-year probe into unreported foreign ties among NIH grantees. The statement, which also announces steps to clarify policies, is being welcomed by some organizations representing affected researchers. But others feel it’s too little, too late—especially as NIH’s efforts to curb foreign interference continue.
The statement released yesterday by NIH Director Monica Bertagnolli, who took the helm in November 2023, reads in part, “I recognize that certain government actions to protect against concerning activities by the PRC [People’s Republic of China] … have had the unintended consequence of creating a difficult climate for our valued Asian American, Asian immigrant and Asian research colleagues who may feel targeted and alienated.” NIH is now working with universities and academic organizations “to take actions that repair our relationships,” her statement continues, including releasing new reporting guidelines.
The move comes 6 years after former President Donald Trump’s administration launched a Department of Justice (DOJ) China Initiative to prevent China from stealing U.S. intellectual property. NIH also launched its own effort to uncover whether grantees had failed disclose ties to “shadow labs” abroad and foreign funding.
DOJ has said its effort ended in 2022, but NIH’s—which has involved sending letters to hundreds of U.S. institutions requesting that they investigate specific researchers—is ongoing. According to the agency, as of 9 June it has identified more than 250 scientists, mostly of Asian descent, who it says have failed to disclose work in China that overlaps with their NIH-funded research or broken other rules. NIH says 112 scientists have lost their jobs as a result.
The Asian American Scholar Forum (AASF), which worked closely with NIH on yesterday’s announcement by providing advice, said: “We deeply appreciate … Bertagnolli’s emphasis on the importance of the relationship with the Asian American scholar community and the significant contributions that they have made to our country.” Referring to the release of a memo clarifying which activities are problematic and a new Decision Matrix for Assessing Potential Foreign Interference, AASF Executive Director Gisela Kusakawa said: “When policies are written down and specified, that helps increase transparency and reduce issues of racial biases.”
But some scientists told Science they took issue with the assertion in Bertagnolli’s statement that “NIH’s approach to addressing foreign interference has been and continues to be applied in a nondiscriminatory manner … that does not discriminate with respect to national origin or identity.” They said they are disappointed NIH denies any racial profiling and did not apologize or acknowledge that, in some cases, NIH’s probe has needlessly destroyed careers and lives. Many of the instances investigated, says Peter Zeidenberg, an attorney who represented some of the accused scientists, “were simple mistakes made out of ignorance of confusing and evolving reporting requirements for which NIH provided no training.”
In a brief phone interview, Bertagnolli told Science, “I do not feel that the NIH has wrongfully targeted Asian scientists in this effort,” but such a perception may have arisen because many cases involved China’s 1000 Talents Program, which recruited U.S.-based researchers to work in China. As for those who were ultimately exonerated but suffered damage to their careers, “if that happened, that is deeply unfair, they don’t deserve that,” Bertagnolli said. But she said “NIH enforcing our long-established policies is not the reason” and instead suggested institutions may have “overreacted” to NIH inquiries.
Some researchers targeted by NIH, as well as administrators at their institutions, have described feeling pressured to take action—even though evidence for deliberate wrongdoing was shaky—because the institution was worried about losing NIH funding. And surveys have suggested scientists born in China have felt singled out by the various U.S. investigative efforts and made to feel unwelcome.
Some researchers told Science they were hoping NIH would apologize to wrongfully accused grantees. “I am disappointed that Chinese American scientists whose labs were shut down for 2 or more years or forced into early retirement because of [NIH’s] overzealous prosecution have not received any apology or compensation,” says Yan Chen, an experimental economist at the University of Michigan. Chen is not an NIH grantee but says she witnessed three colleagues’ labs shut down for unjustified reasons.
University of Houston electrical engineer Steven Pei worries new guidelines aren’t enough. “NIH must also implement open and fair due process and procedures to prevent administrators from overreacting and unjustly targeting researchers in the name of security or caution,” says Pei, who co-leads the nonprofit Asian Pacific American Justice Task Force.
Several Chinese or Chinese American scientists who have publicly voiced concerns about the NIH probe said they welcomed yesterday’s statement. “This is a very important step toward rebuilding trust by Asian and Asian American scientists,” says Yale University pathologist Qin Yan. “I look forward to continued dialogue and measures to support the scientists who were unfairly impacted by the past actions of government agencies.”
And the Committee of 100, a nonprofit group of prominent Chinese Americans, adds: “We commend the NIH for recognizing this harm and agree that moving forward, our focus should be on fostering an inclusive, welcoming, and collaborative environment for all scientists and researchers, including those of Chinese and Asian descent.”
