[ad_1]
National Cancer Institute
By Jeffrey Mervis
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) has recently reviewed the role of NIH funding, which is believed to have been established by Bethesda, Maryland-based institute did not know about.
Universities are scrambling to respond to the unprecedented queries, which appear to be more important than any other country in the world. The goal is to prevent theft of intellectual property and the transfer of technologies that could threaten U.S. security. But some academic administrators worry about the exercise could chill over all types of international scientific collaborations.
"People have already told me that they are rethinking whether they should continue to work. "They say, 'Maybe I should just work, or find a U.S.-based collaborator.'" ScienceInsider that their university had received such a letter; all requested anonymity.
Another fear is that the inquiry may become a vehicle to impugn the loyalty of any faculty member and any foreign-born scientist. For example, ScienceInsider has learned that at some institutions, every researcher is flagged by NIH is Chinese-American.
The vaguely worded letters do not contain specific charges. Rather, they ask the university to explain a faculty member's apparent failure to disclose a foreign connection to NIH.
It is not clear how the agency develops its list of targeted researchers. One chance is a data-mining exercise designed to flag a country in the field of scientific research or reporting. University officials have told ScienceInsider that some allegations have been made to be unfounded, or because they have not been disclosed.
Last summer, NIH Francis Collins Director hinted that such personalized letters might be on their way. In a 20 August 2018 missive to more than 10,000 institutions, he asserted that "threats to the integrity of US biomedical research existed" and highlighted the failure to disclose "substantial resources of other organizations, including foreign governments." Collins wrote that "in the weeks and months ahead [NIH] regarding … requests about specific … staff from your institution. "
NIH officials have declined to discuss any aspect of the process. But one university administrator told ScienceInsider that a wave of letters sent in January targeted 77 institutions. NIH typically asked the schools to answer the question.
One possibility, however, is that NIH could refer to their parent agency, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). A failure to disclose foreign relations on an NIH grant application violates long-standing departmental rules and could lead to sanctions. (Such disclosure is part of a broader NIH requirement that [their] research endeavors. ") Last month. Senator Charles Grassley (R-IA) revealed that NIH has asked HHS to investigate 12 such cases, but the lawmaker did not say how NIH learned of the allegations.
NIH's description of what kind of foreign policy is covered by the disclosure policy. For example, must a researcher disclose an honorary degree from a foreign university, or only joined to that university? Do fees to researcher get from consulting a source of "direct support" for their research? Should researchers disclose a collaboration with a foreign scientist in which funds are co-authored, but that results in a co-authored publication in which the scientist cites the foreign colleague's source of funding as a matter of professional courtesy?
University officials say it's never been clear that it's a free choice, but it's only a matter of time, if they receive a 9-month salary from their university. Many universities do not pay too much attention to what they are doing while they are doing so, so they do not interfere with their teaching and administrative duties.
In discussions with university administrators, NIH officials The first is by stealing a researcher's point of view. The second is having work with an existing NIH grant and, thus, a waste of government funds. The third relates to the size of the investment; a large foreign contribution, NIH officials have said, creates "a substantial distortion" of NIH's portfolio.
In the past, university officials say, any confusion over the disclosure rules would be worked out amicably in discussions with NIH. But one of the world's authoritative researches must be done.
"The official says," I'm supposed to be fostering our institution's relationship with government funding agencies. "But these letters strike a very different tone. And to be honest, I do not have the bandwidth to be an auditor facilitator. "
More worrisome, the official says, is the message it could be sending to U.S. researchers: If you want to avoid trouble, do not stray beyond the border in the pursuit of the next breakthrough in science.
[ad_2]
Source link