Forum reveals deep distrust between Asian American scientists and NIH

A recent forum aimed at repairing the relationship between the US National Institutes of Health and Asian American scientists has revealed the depth of distrust and the significant work needed to rebuild it.

More than 650 people registered for the online forum, hosted on Thursday by the Asian American Scholar Forum and the NIH, and more than 60 questions were submitted, said Gisela Perez Kusakawa, executive director of the AASF and moderator of the discussion.

"This forum is really of critical importance and very timely for the community with many very much interested in hearing directly" from the NIH leadership, Kusakawa said.

Most of the comments posted in the forum's Zoom chat were expressions of discontent.

NIH Director Monica Bertagnolli said she is "deeply concerned about the difficult climate our valued Asian research colleagues have been facing", and the NIH wants to "continue to hear from you, and particularly from those who may have lost trust in institutional and government support".

NIH Principal Deputy Director Lawrence Tabak then addressed the questions raised by the scientists.

However, the leadership and the participants did not agree on what occurred when the NIH in 2016 first sent out letters to leaders of more than 100 institutions, requesting verification of proper research fund usage.

The Asian Faculty Association at Yale University, citing a Science magazine report titled "Pall of suspicion", said Michael Lauer, deputy director for extramural research at the NIH, forced universities to place principal investigators on involuntary leave during investigations.

"Will there be changes regarding this practice?" it questioned.

Tabak refuted the claims made in the Science article, saying such decisions are not made by any single individual at the NIH and require the support of the full NIH leadership.

Forum participant Yan Chen challenged Tabak's response, sharing personal accounts from colleagues whose labs were shut down following a call from "someone higher up in NIH" to their university's research office. "They said the process described in the Science article (was) accurate, based on their own experience," Chen said.

Tabak said the NIH may impose remedies for noncompliance, which "really depend on the specifics".

According to the Science report, 103 out of 246 targeted scientists in NIH investigations were either terminated by their institutions or resigned.

Tabak acknowledged the loss of talented scientists resulting from the NIH's investigatory practices.

"There is no doubt that unless we are successful in restoring trust, we're going to fall short here," he said. "The contributions made by Asian scientists are extraordinary. And this sort of reverse talent drain, if you will, is something that we would like to mitigate. It really comes down, though, to trust."

With Congress poised to reactivate the discontinued China Initiative program, Bertagnolli and Tabak pointed to the NIH procedure as a way to stand against political pressure that could lead to targeting or overzealous scrutiny of Asian American scholars.

However, another forum participant, Yihong Ye, saw the potential revival of the China Initiative as a failure on the part of the NIH.

"While our politicians may not understand how science is done and why international collaboration is important, NIH, particularly leaders at NIH, should know that well and should have the responsibility to educate our politicians and guide them to reach the best policy," Ye said.

"Knowing that the previous policy, which was initially launched to stop foreign spies, failed completely to achieve its goal and still let our politicians restart that failed policy is a big disappointment."