12 ms·

Scientists have lost their jobs after NIH probe into foreign ties

126 points by elsewhen 6y ago

MintelIE 6y ago
It'd be interesting to see what research these spies were stealing or influencing.
- basilgohar 6y ago
  I think it's early to assume that these were spies. I am sure that is one of the narratives about this, though.
- rdxm 6y ago
  short answer is pretty much anything they could get their hands on. this is espionage (state and commercial) 101 type stuff...
- toofy 6y ago
  I’d say calling them ‘spies’ may be unwarranted, particularly when it appears—from the context of the article–this was more about trying to cement the importance of paying close attention when disclosing your funding sources. Those who the investigation found had disclosed their funding sources were from other countries didn’t seem to be impacted.
knolax 6y ago
> In the vast majority of cases, Lauer reported, the person being investigated has been an Asian man in his 50 We're going to skip the McCarthyism and go straight to racial profiling I guess. > resulted in criminal charges against some prominent researchers, including Charles Lieber, chair of Harvard University’s department of chemistry and chemical biology. Definitely the name of an Asian man in his 50s.
- xjwm 6y ago
  > We're going to skip the McCarthyism and go straight to racial profiling I guess. Lauer said the fact that 82% of those being investigated are Asian “is not surprising” because “that’s who the Chinese target” in their foreign talent recruitment programs.
  - knolax 6y ago
    Or the people investigating did so with the belief that "the Chinese target Asian men" and ended up rounding up a bunch of Asian men. If "the Chinese are targeting Asians", why would the most prominent example be a non-Asian? Presumably being a prominent researcher makes one harder to influence, and if they were targeting Asians, it would have to be because being Asian makes them easier to influence. If the goal is to influence the most important research, then you would want to influence the most prominent researchers, of which the lowest cost researchers to influence would be a prominent Asian researcher, not a promiment non-Asian researcher. In addition, if your goal is finding influence, and you end up finding one non-Asian being prominent lyinfluenced, and a bunch of Asians not being as prominently influenced, it generally either means non-Asians are being more prominently influenced in general, or you've been ignoring non-Asians to the point that you only notice the prominent ones.
    - xjwm 6y ago
      Looking at the linked article[0], it looks like this is the result of a broader investigation into any undisclosed foreign ties, but it that the Chinese influence has been disproportionately large. Lelling rejects criticism that the department has unfairly targeted ethnic Chinese people and other Asian Americans. “Dr. Lieber is probably the most prominent academic charged in this kind of case so far,” Lelling says, “and he is not a Chinese national, nor is he of Chinese descent.” But Lelling says China’s aggressive efforts to become the world leader in many high-tech fields has meant devoting more resources to tracking those of Chinese ancestry. [0] https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/02/us-prosecutor-leading-china-probe-explains-effort-led-charges-against-harvard-chemist https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/02/us-prosecutor-leadin...
      - 6y ago
- take_a_breath 6y ago
  So, racial profiling is bad, except when you do it?
bosswipe 6y ago
I don't understand. What is the danger that this poses? Is it that the American government is funding science that only benefits China somehow? How?
- SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
  The danger is that people who are secretly funded by the Chinese government, and lie about it to the US government, might be flipped to foreign agents in case of conflict. The funding itself I agree isn't an issue, and the probe doesn't seem to have targeted people who were honest about it.
  - coliveira 6y ago
    Communist scare all over again? Using this logic we should go over everywhere in the US to see who has ties to China just like they did in the 50s against the soviet union. Everyone knows how that ended...
    - ipsocannibal 6y ago
      I think you can look at the actions and history of the CCP and be pretty wary of their intent and the methods they will use to get there. China estimates 16.5M died due to the Great Leap Forward, the Cultural Revolution brought millions more deaths. Fast forward to more recent events in tiananmen square, Xinjiang, Hong Kong, etc. and one can be easily made skeptical of the motives of the CCP.
      - Angeo34 6y ago
        If that's how you look at it the US must be the literal devil with China his junior in training.
        ipsocannibal 6y ago
        And how exactly? What metrics are you baseing this claim upon. Name them and lets compare.
basilgohar 6y ago
As an American that has received his fair share of indoctrination and with no deep love for a lot of China's domestic as well as foreign policy, I am curious about a few things, sincerely: 1. Are these as egregious as we are led to believe? 2. Are these really a sign of deep foreign influence? 3. Can it be that these are actually just minor oversights of a large number of individuals without needing to jump to the worst conclusion of these scientists being spies (as one other comment has already asserted)? I am not trying to water down what may be a serious case of foreign influence, but if this is something common and/or easy to fall into, it's possible this is an overreaction and may cause harm to the research community. The article is worded in a way that doesn't clarify if the focus was only on Chinese influence or if this was broadly designed to capture any foreign influence. I ask these questions to broaden the discussion because oftentimes research and academic centers can have overly broad requests on disclosure which can be very invasive and, truth be told, if everyone answered fully and clearly, a lot of people would probably be excluded, and that begs the question if these are essential or not in my humble opinion. To be clear, I am very much for limiting foreign influence on domestic policy, whether it's via research or otherwise, but I think it bears practicing greater skepticism when something may just be a proxy for "action" rather than sincere positive results.
- free_rms 6y ago
  Sir. We find your questioning of official policy very concerning. Are you now or have you ever been a member of the communist party?
- sdenton4 6y ago
  Yeah, from the article: "Lauer also presented data on the nature of the violations that NIH has uncovered. Some 70% (133) of the researchers had failed to disclose to NIH the receipt of a foreign grant, and 54% had failed to disclose participation in a foreign talent program. In contrast, Lauer said, only 9% hid ties to a foreign company, and only 4% had an undisclosed foreign patent. Some 5% of cases involved a violation of NIH’s peer-review system." So sounds like ~90% of the 189 violations maybe just not checking a box. It's not clear to me what the violations were for the 54 people who were fired. From where I sit, science espionage from China certainly sounds plausible (And should be dealt with), but ginning up negligible issues to get rid of the wrong kind of people is a completely plausible move from the current administration.
choxi 6y ago
Supposing they were spying, what’s the edge that China gets since NIH research gets published publicly anyway?
- BasDirks 6y ago
  Perhaps one danger is influence on agenda?
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- foepys 6y ago
  It's probably not about what gets punished but what does not get published. China might suppress information that could be important. There is no reason for the researchers to hide payments from China if they were honest and the NIH obviously agrees.
- ipv6ipv4 6y ago
  They can influence the direction and conclusions of the research. Undermining the science altogether. Leading to bad policy and harming the NIH’s and science’s public reputation as a whole. Not unlike what Coca-Cola has been doing to nutrition science.[] [] https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/how-coca-cola-disguised-its-influence-science-about-sugar-and-health https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/how-coca-cola-disguised-its...
  - coliveira 6y ago
    The same argument can be used to say that researchers shouldn't receive money from USA, because this will influence the direction of their research conclusions and undermine the science altogether. If you don't know, a major contributor to science in the US is the DoD, and we know that the DoD has a mandate to act against perceived "enemies" of the American government.
    - ipv6ipv4 6y ago
pphysch 6y ago
Commence phase 1 of the US political purges.
lala26in 6y ago
Good
Magodo 6y ago
An external perspective from a non-American; I think curbing any kind of foreign influence is a good thing based on China related news in my own country. Also I think a large part of criticism of these actions are generated by people thinking such actions are racist and hence just wrong and no matter what, unjustifiable. That kind of weak thinking is just not acceptable when China has been openly hostile on so many fronts...
- coliveira 6y ago
  I don't see this kind of hostility. China is a commercial competitor. The US is trying to transform commercial competition into a racist war. I think this is despicable.
  - ipsocannibal 6y ago
    One typical CCP propaganda tactic is make intellectually dishonest accusations of racism to deflect from CCP malfeasance. The CCP has a long history of using seemingly benign interactions with foreign nations as an opportunity for espionage. Scurtiny of all ties to China, especially hidden ties, is just due diligence at this point.
    - evidencebased 6y ago
      One typical American propaganda tactic is to suggest that only communist countries that the US doesn't like are conducting espionage, or that espionage is uncommon in geopolitics. This way, the US government can easily justify discriminatory policies that unjustly targets, say Chinese researchers, to its public. The US has a long history of spying on foreign nations and stealing IP to benefit American businesses. US media has a long history of outright lying and otherwise spreading propaganda to manufacture consent for the government. Any accusations by the US government against other countries should be taken with a giant grain of salt, especially without proof.
      - ipsocannibal 6y ago
        Sounds reasonable. Lets see those investigations from other nations concerning US actions. Please do link to these occurrences as they will further the discussion of the role of espionage in scientific research.
coliveira 6y ago
So basically we see the reemergence of the communist scare, a sick and demented policy that criminalized professionals who were perceived to be "collaborating" with an "enemy" foreign country. This makes me disgusted.
- toofy 6y ago
  There do seem to be some strong indicators there might be a push in that direction. The rising levels of fear mongering directed at others has me a tad concerned. At the very least, I think people should be aware this may be happening.
  - coliveira 6y ago
    And this is specially sickening when it is directed at scientists, an area where it always necessary to collaborate across the world. To be very clear, if the Chinese are investing billions of dollars in research I want to collaborate with them, it has nothing to do with my nationality.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
- driverdan 6y ago
  I downvoted you because you're wrong. There are strict rules to prevent foreign influence and these people didn't follow them.
komali2 6y ago
It a shame this is happening. Surprisingly the new Space Force show on Netflix is remarkably topical. There's an episode where a political disagreement is encountered between America and the PRC. The chief scientist at space force (whose character is basically "science good, military bad") argues that a simple conversation with the PRC science team should clear things up, because "science is a fraternity that knows no borders." It goes FUBAR when the PRC science team turn out to be just as political as their bureaucratic counterparts. Ideally science would be a borderless fraternity/sorority... I wonder how bureaucrats and politicians manage to override scientist's own values as such to indoctrinate them with patriotism?
- stareatgoats 6y ago
  Scientists are vulnerable to nationalist sentiments same as anyone else. “Of course the people don’t want war. But (...) all you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger.” — Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials
- ianai 6y ago
  I think the frat/sorority days end when they walk across the stage for their degree if not sooner. Funding needs and publish or perish make people pretty dog eat dog. In my corporate experience the more technical and especially once people have phds they turn pretty toxic and less group oriented quickly.
- catalogia 6y ago
  I don't know much about America's "Space Force", but as I understand it NASA is forbidden by federal law from collaborating with the PRC, which is why the PRC cannot participate in the ISS.
- dumb1224 6y ago
  It's such a common theme that I see everywhere. I know the chinese population have been known notoriously nationalistic but having lived in Ireland in my early research years and it was just as bad (was the period when queen of Britain visiting Ireland)... I think it's to do with identity.
jryb 6y ago
Most everyone here is missing the point. The real problem is that NIH funding is limited and competitive, and the NIH needs to prioritize funding labs that don't already have enough money. I'm not discounting that some people involved in this process may be motivated by completely different reasons, but having a complete picture of existing funding sources when distributing grants makes sense regardless of the geopolitical context.
- xenocyon 6y ago
  > NIH needs to prioritize funding labs that don't already have enough money So then why the focus on foreign grants? From the article: > [Of the scientists who were fired/resigned] Some 70% (133) of the researchers had failed to disclose to NIH the receipt of a foreign grant, and 54% had failed to disclose participation in a foreign talent program. In contrast, Lauer said, only 9% hid ties to a foreign company, and only 4% had an undisclosed foreign patent. Some 5% of cases involved a violation of NIH’s peer-review system.
  - jryb 6y ago
    Well, there certainly may be other motivations at play, but it's also easier to keep foreign grants secret. The NIH, NSF, and American Cancer Society all make their awards public and searchable (I assume it's true for any organization with serious money or federal funding but those are the only ones I have come across). That said I also don't know if the federal funding agencies actually check outside of their own organization whether someone failed to mention a grant on an application.
goodcjw2 6y ago
St happens when politics meddles with sciences.
- dominotw 6y ago
  > politics meddles with sciences. referring to chinese ip-stealing?
  - Angeo34 6y ago
    Probably he meant US stealing IP from Europe , especially Germany.
    - chance_state 6y ago
      B-b-but America
coliveira 6y ago
"Lauer also presented data on the nature of the violations that NIH has uncovered. Some 70% (133) of the researchers had failed to disclose to NIH the receipt of a foreign grant, and 54% had failed to disclose participation in a foreign talent program. In contrast, Lauer said, only 9% hid ties to a foreign company, and only 4% had an undisclosed foreign patent." Based on this, many foreign researchers that cooperates with the United Stated, and there are several thousands of them, should be severely punished in his/her country of origin. Most researchers in foreign countries cooperate with American research organizations that transfer technology to US the industry. Just for an example, my home country exchanges information about the Amazon with American institutions, and much of that information is passed on to pharmaceutical companies operating around the world. This is a despicable action that targets China in a way that is racist and hypocrite.
- Magodo 6y ago
  My comment might be reported as flame bait but I have to say this. Imagine the Secret Of the Universe™, is discovered. I'm just saying I'd much rather live in a world where such a secret is entrusted into American hands rather than Chinese ones. My point being, do not be careless in applying ideals and ideologies to peoples (or governments in this case) that do not deserve them
  - evidencebased 6y ago
    "My point being, do not be careless in applying ideals and ideologies to peoples (or governments in this case) that do not deserve them" You're literally doing that but for the US. The families of countless people killed by the US in its illegal wars over just the past several decades would disagree with you, if they haven't been wiped out themselves. Same goes for the countless people that starved to death from US sanctions because their government refused to bow to the US empire.
  - coliveira 6y ago
    Quite the opposite, in fact if you discover such a secret the best thing to do is to put it out in the open for everyone to see, so that no country can use it as a secret tool against others.
peteradio 6y ago
For those who are wondering what harm this could cause to western countries, I think it's an interesting point: Researcher's spiking interesting results in public but funneling them home.
BeetleB 6y ago
The real question is whether they are going after similar offenses when the source of funding in is some other country...? There was a controversy not long ago about Saudi funding. Some very mediocre Saudi universities were entering the top rankings for research because they paid a lot of well known professors to have affiliate positions at those universities. This suddenly caused a crazy boost in rankings. Now I doubt those researchers failed to disclose their affiliation/funding (the whole point of the scheme was for them to openly be affiliated). But if they had, would the US government go after them? > Even more surprising, though, was that a little-known university in Saudi Arabia, King Abdulaziz University, or KAU, ranked seventh in the world in mathematics — despite the fact that it didn’t have a doctorate program in math until two years ago. https://www.dailycal.org/2014/12/05/citations-sale/ https://www.dailycal.org/2014/12/05/citations-sale/ http://blogs.nature.com/houseofwisdom/2012/01/are-saudi-universities-buying-their-way-into-top-charts.html http://blogs.nature.com/houseofwisdom/2012/01/are-saudi-univ...
- dmix 6y ago
  Well, from the first sentence it says 7% were from other countries: > In 93% of those cases, the hidden funding came from a Chinese institution. 54 * 0.07 = 3.78 non-Chinese scientists (I'm guessing the 93% has been rounded) Edit: nevermind the number 54 was total termination, the 93% was 175/189 of "Scientists NIH contacted institution" where Chinese https://acd.od.nih.gov/documents/presentations/06122020ForeignInfluences.pdf https://acd.od.nih.gov/documents/presentations/06122020Forei...
Overtonwindow 6y ago
I can see that this could be a case of accidentally not checking a box, but at the same time, lack of knowledge or a mistake is not an excuse for breaking the law. I do firmly believe that China has infiltrated our research institutions and actively funneling that back to China. We should do more to guard against that, and if this is the necessary first step, then maybe its enforcement will lead to better oversight in the future by the institutions. It's really the institutions that must shoulder some of the blame for not also conducting their due diligence.
afrojack123 6y ago
Its good to see that American tax dollars are no longer being used to help a country trying to undermine America.
av_engr 6y ago
This is kind of off-topic since the issue was these scientists lying about their ties to a foreign government. I wanted to address how people think there's no IP theft here. Although results and information about the research are often published to the public, experimental setup and some technical details are usually not included in the publication. Just because a paper on the research will eventually be available to the public doesn't mean the technology can be easily replicated. The concern here is that the real hard work that comes from months of trial and error is being stolen to competing nations that would take advantage of the theft to claim the author of such technology. Not to mention the tech is funded by American taxpayer dollars and developed by scientists who spent years and months on it. There's a recent incident on a Chinese Scientist lying about his affiliation with the Chinese Military and have been sending proprietary lab information to China. See: https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2020/06/11/alleged-chinese-spy-arrested-at-lax-arrested-for-stealing-research-from-uc-san-francisco/ https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2020/06/11/alleged-chinese...

126 points by elsewhen 6y ago

MintelIE 6y ago

It'd be interesting to see what research these spies were stealing or influencing.

basilgohar 6y ago
I think it's early to assume that these were spies. I am sure that is one of the narratives about this, though.
rdxm 6y ago
short answer is pretty much anything they could get their hands on. this is espionage (state and commercial) 101 type stuff...
toofy 6y ago
I’d say calling them ‘spies’ may be unwarranted, particularly when it appears—from the context of the article–this was more about trying to cement the importance of paying close attention when disclosing your funding sources. Those who the investigation found had disclosed their funding sources were from other countries didn’t seem to be impacted.

knolax 6y ago

> In the vast majority of cases, Lauer reported, the person being investigated has been an Asian man in his 50 We're going to skip the McCarthyism and go straight to racial profiling I guess. > resulted in criminal charges against some prominent researchers, including Charles Lieber, chair of Harvard University’s department of chemistry and chemical biology. Definitely the name of an Asian man in his 50s.

xjwm 6y ago
> We're going to skip the McCarthyism and go straight to racial profiling I guess. Lauer said the fact that 82% of those being investigated are Asian “is not surprising” because “that’s who the Chinese target” in their foreign talent recruitment programs.
- knolax 6y ago
  Or the people investigating did so with the belief that "the Chinese target Asian men" and ended up rounding up a bunch of Asian men. If "the Chinese are targeting Asians", why would the most prominent example be a non-Asian? Presumably being a prominent researcher makes one harder to influence, and if they were targeting Asians, it would have to be because being Asian makes them easier to influence. If the goal is to influence the most important research, then you would want to influence the most prominent researchers, of which the lowest cost researchers to influence would be a prominent Asian researcher, not a promiment non-Asian researcher. In addition, if your goal is finding influence, and you end up finding one non-Asian being prominent lyinfluenced, and a bunch of Asians not being as prominently influenced, it generally either means non-Asians are being more prominently influenced in general, or you've been ignoring non-Asians to the point that you only notice the prominent ones.
  - xjwm 6y ago
    Looking at the linked article[0], it looks like this is the result of a broader investigation into any undisclosed foreign ties, but it that the Chinese influence has been disproportionately large. Lelling rejects criticism that the department has unfairly targeted ethnic Chinese people and other Asian Americans. “Dr. Lieber is probably the most prominent academic charged in this kind of case so far,” Lelling says, “and he is not a Chinese national, nor is he of Chinese descent.” But Lelling says China’s aggressive efforts to become the world leader in many high-tech fields has meant devoting more resources to tracking those of Chinese ancestry. [0] https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/02/us-prosecutor-leading-china-probe-explains-effort-led-charges-against-harvard-chemist https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/02/us-prosecutor-leadin...
    - 6y ago
take_a_breath 6y ago
So, racial profiling is bad, except when you do it?

bosswipe 6y ago

I don't understand. What is the danger that this poses? Is it that the American government is funding science that only benefits China somehow? How?

SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
The danger is that people who are secretly funded by the Chinese government, and lie about it to the US government, might be flipped to foreign agents in case of conflict. The funding itself I agree isn't an issue, and the probe doesn't seem to have targeted people who were honest about it.
- coliveira 6y ago
  Communist scare all over again? Using this logic we should go over everywhere in the US to see who has ties to China just like they did in the 50s against the soviet union. Everyone knows how that ended...
  - ipsocannibal 6y ago
    I think you can look at the actions and history of the CCP and be pretty wary of their intent and the methods they will use to get there. China estimates 16.5M died due to the Great Leap Forward, the Cultural Revolution brought millions more deaths. Fast forward to more recent events in tiananmen square, Xinjiang, Hong Kong, etc. and one can be easily made skeptical of the motives of the CCP.
    - Angeo34 6y ago
      If that's how you look at it the US must be the literal devil with China his junior in training.
      - ipsocannibal 6y ago
        And how exactly? What metrics are you baseing this claim upon. Name them and lets compare.

basilgohar 6y ago

As an American that has received his fair share of indoctrination and with no deep love for a lot of China's domestic as well as foreign policy, I am curious about a few things, sincerely: 1. Are these as egregious as we are led to believe? 2. Are these really a sign of deep foreign influence? 3. Can it be that these are actually just minor oversights of a large number of individuals without needing to jump to the worst conclusion of these scientists being spies (as one other comment has already asserted)? I am not trying to water down what may be a serious case of foreign influence, but if this is something common and/or easy to fall into, it's possible this is an overreaction and may cause harm to the research community. The article is worded in a way that doesn't clarify if the focus was only on Chinese influence or if this was broadly designed to capture any foreign influence. I ask these questions to broaden the discussion because oftentimes research and academic centers can have overly broad requests on disclosure which can be very invasive and, truth be told, if everyone answered fully and clearly, a lot of people would probably be excluded, and that begs the question if these are essential or not in my humble opinion. To be clear, I am very much for limiting foreign influence on domestic policy, whether it's via research or otherwise, but I think it bears practicing greater skepticism when something may just be a proxy for "action" rather than sincere positive results.

free_rms 6y ago
Sir. We find your questioning of official policy very concerning. Are you now or have you ever been a member of the communist party?
sdenton4 6y ago
Yeah, from the article: "Lauer also presented data on the nature of the violations that NIH has uncovered. Some 70% (133) of the researchers had failed to disclose to NIH the receipt of a foreign grant, and 54% had failed to disclose participation in a foreign talent program. In contrast, Lauer said, only 9% hid ties to a foreign company, and only 4% had an undisclosed foreign patent. Some 5% of cases involved a violation of NIH’s peer-review system." So sounds like ~90% of the 189 violations maybe just not checking a box. It's not clear to me what the violations were for the 54 people who were fired. From where I sit, science espionage from China certainly sounds plausible (And should be dealt with), but ginning up negligible issues to get rid of the wrong kind of people is a completely plausible move from the current administration.

choxi 6y ago

Supposing they were spying, what’s the edge that China gets since NIH research gets published publicly anyway?

BasDirks 6y ago
Perhaps one danger is influence on agenda?
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
foepys 6y ago
It's probably not about what gets punished but what does not get published. China might suppress information that could be important. There is no reason for the researchers to hide payments from China if they were honest and the NIH obviously agrees.
ipv6ipv4 6y ago
They can influence the direction and conclusions of the research. Undermining the science altogether. Leading to bad policy and harming the NIH’s and science’s public reputation as a whole. Not unlike what Coca-Cola has been doing to nutrition science.[] [] https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/how-coca-cola-disguised-its-influence-science-about-sugar-and-health https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/how-coca-cola-disguised-its...
- coliveira 6y ago
  The same argument can be used to say that researchers shouldn't receive money from USA, because this will influence the direction of their research conclusions and undermine the science altogether. If you don't know, a major contributor to science in the US is the DoD, and we know that the DoD has a mandate to act against perceived "enemies" of the American government.
  - ipv6ipv4 6y ago

pphysch 6y ago

Commence phase 1 of the US political purges.

lala26in 6y ago

Good

Magodo 6y ago

An external perspective from a non-American; I think curbing any kind of foreign influence is a good thing based on China related news in my own country. Also I think a large part of criticism of these actions are generated by people thinking such actions are racist and hence just wrong and no matter what, unjustifiable. That kind of weak thinking is just not acceptable when China has been openly hostile on so many fronts...

coliveira 6y ago
I don't see this kind of hostility. China is a commercial competitor. The US is trying to transform commercial competition into a racist war. I think this is despicable.
- ipsocannibal 6y ago
  One typical CCP propaganda tactic is make intellectually dishonest accusations of racism to deflect from CCP malfeasance. The CCP has a long history of using seemingly benign interactions with foreign nations as an opportunity for espionage. Scurtiny of all ties to China, especially hidden ties, is just due diligence at this point.
  - evidencebased 6y ago
    One typical American propaganda tactic is to suggest that only communist countries that the US doesn't like are conducting espionage, or that espionage is uncommon in geopolitics. This way, the US government can easily justify discriminatory policies that unjustly targets, say Chinese researchers, to its public. The US has a long history of spying on foreign nations and stealing IP to benefit American businesses. US media has a long history of outright lying and otherwise spreading propaganda to manufacture consent for the government. Any accusations by the US government against other countries should be taken with a giant grain of salt, especially without proof.
    - ipsocannibal 6y ago
      Sounds reasonable. Lets see those investigations from other nations concerning US actions. Please do link to these occurrences as they will further the discussion of the role of espionage in scientific research.

coliveira 6y ago

So basically we see the reemergence of the communist scare, a sick and demented policy that criminalized professionals who were perceived to be "collaborating" with an "enemy" foreign country. This makes me disgusted.

toofy 6y ago
There do seem to be some strong indicators there might be a push in that direction. The rising levels of fear mongering directed at others has me a tad concerned. At the very least, I think people should be aware this may be happening.
- coliveira 6y ago
  And this is specially sickening when it is directed at scientists, an area where it always necessary to collaborate across the world. To be very clear, if the Chinese are investing billions of dollars in research I want to collaborate with them, it has nothing to do with my nationality.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
driverdan 6y ago
I downvoted you because you're wrong. There are strict rules to prevent foreign influence and these people didn't follow them.

komali2 6y ago

It a shame this is happening. Surprisingly the new Space Force show on Netflix is remarkably topical. There's an episode where a political disagreement is encountered between America and the PRC. The chief scientist at space force (whose character is basically "science good, military bad") argues that a simple conversation with the PRC science team should clear things up, because "science is a fraternity that knows no borders." It goes FUBAR when the PRC science team turn out to be just as political as their bureaucratic counterparts. Ideally science would be a borderless fraternity/sorority... I wonder how bureaucrats and politicians manage to override scientist's own values as such to indoctrinate them with patriotism?

stareatgoats 6y ago
Scientists are vulnerable to nationalist sentiments same as anyone else. “Of course the people don’t want war. But (...) all you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger.” — Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials
ianai 6y ago
I think the frat/sorority days end when they walk across the stage for their degree if not sooner. Funding needs and publish or perish make people pretty dog eat dog. In my corporate experience the more technical and especially once people have phds they turn pretty toxic and less group oriented quickly.
catalogia 6y ago
I don't know much about America's "Space Force", but as I understand it NASA is forbidden by federal law from collaborating with the PRC, which is why the PRC cannot participate in the ISS.
dumb1224 6y ago
It's such a common theme that I see everywhere. I know the chinese population have been known notoriously nationalistic but having lived in Ireland in my early research years and it was just as bad (was the period when queen of Britain visiting Ireland)... I think it's to do with identity.

jryb 6y ago

Most everyone here is missing the point. The real problem is that NIH funding is limited and competitive, and the NIH needs to prioritize funding labs that don't already have enough money. I'm not discounting that some people involved in this process may be motivated by completely different reasons, but having a complete picture of existing funding sources when distributing grants makes sense regardless of the geopolitical context.

xenocyon 6y ago
> NIH needs to prioritize funding labs that don't already have enough money So then why the focus on foreign grants? From the article: > [Of the scientists who were fired/resigned] Some 70% (133) of the researchers had failed to disclose to NIH the receipt of a foreign grant, and 54% had failed to disclose participation in a foreign talent program. In contrast, Lauer said, only 9% hid ties to a foreign company, and only 4% had an undisclosed foreign patent. Some 5% of cases involved a violation of NIH’s peer-review system.
- jryb 6y ago
  Well, there certainly may be other motivations at play, but it's also easier to keep foreign grants secret. The NIH, NSF, and American Cancer Society all make their awards public and searchable (I assume it's true for any organization with serious money or federal funding but those are the only ones I have come across). That said I also don't know if the federal funding agencies actually check outside of their own organization whether someone failed to mention a grant on an application.

goodcjw2 6y ago

St happens when politics meddles with sciences.

dominotw 6y ago
> politics meddles with sciences. referring to chinese ip-stealing?
- Angeo34 6y ago
  Probably he meant US stealing IP from Europe , especially Germany.
  - chance_state 6y ago
    B-b-but America

coliveira 6y ago

"Lauer also presented data on the nature of the violations that NIH has uncovered. Some 70% (133) of the researchers had failed to disclose to NIH the receipt of a foreign grant, and 54% had failed to disclose participation in a foreign talent program. In contrast, Lauer said, only 9% hid ties to a foreign company, and only 4% had an undisclosed foreign patent." Based on this, many foreign researchers that cooperates with the United Stated, and there are several thousands of them, should be severely punished in his/her country of origin. Most researchers in foreign countries cooperate with American research organizations that transfer technology to US the industry. Just for an example, my home country exchanges information about the Amazon with American institutions, and much of that information is passed on to pharmaceutical companies operating around the world. This is a despicable action that targets China in a way that is racist and hypocrite.

Magodo 6y ago
My comment might be reported as flame bait but I have to say this. Imagine the Secret Of the Universe™, is discovered. I'm just saying I'd much rather live in a world where such a secret is entrusted into American hands rather than Chinese ones. My point being, do not be careless in applying ideals and ideologies to peoples (or governments in this case) that do not deserve them
- evidencebased 6y ago
  "My point being, do not be careless in applying ideals and ideologies to peoples (or governments in this case) that do not deserve them" You're literally doing that but for the US. The families of countless people killed by the US in its illegal wars over just the past several decades would disagree with you, if they haven't been wiped out themselves. Same goes for the countless people that starved to death from US sanctions because their government refused to bow to the US empire.
- coliveira 6y ago
  Quite the opposite, in fact if you discover such a secret the best thing to do is to put it out in the open for everyone to see, so that no country can use it as a secret tool against others.

peteradio 6y ago

For those who are wondering what harm this could cause to western countries, I think it's an interesting point: Researcher's spiking interesting results in public but funneling them home.

BeetleB 6y ago

The real question is whether they are going after similar offenses when the source of funding in is some other country...? There was a controversy not long ago about Saudi funding. Some very mediocre Saudi universities were entering the top rankings for research because they paid a lot of well known professors to have affiliate positions at those universities. This suddenly caused a crazy boost in rankings. Now I doubt those researchers failed to disclose their affiliation/funding (the whole point of the scheme was for them to openly be affiliated). But if they had, would the US government go after them? > Even more surprising, though, was that a little-known university in Saudi Arabia, King Abdulaziz University, or KAU, ranked seventh in the world in mathematics — despite the fact that it didn’t have a doctorate program in math until two years ago. https://www.dailycal.org/2014/12/05/citations-sale/ https://www.dailycal.org/2014/12/05/citations-sale/ http://blogs.nature.com/houseofwisdom/2012/01/are-saudi-universities-buying-their-way-into-top-charts.html http://blogs.nature.com/houseofwisdom/2012/01/are-saudi-univ...

dmix 6y ago
Well, from the first sentence it says 7% were from other countries: > In 93% of those cases, the hidden funding came from a Chinese institution. 54 * 0.07 = 3.78 non-Chinese scientists (I'm guessing the 93% has been rounded) Edit: nevermind the number 54 was total termination, the 93% was 175/189 of "Scientists NIH contacted institution" where Chinese https://acd.od.nih.gov/documents/presentations/06122020ForeignInfluences.pdf https://acd.od.nih.gov/documents/presentations/06122020Forei...

Overtonwindow 6y ago

I can see that this could be a case of accidentally not checking a box, but at the same time, lack of knowledge or a mistake is not an excuse for breaking the law. I do firmly believe that China has infiltrated our research institutions and actively funneling that back to China. We should do more to guard against that, and if this is the necessary first step, then maybe its enforcement will lead to better oversight in the future by the institutions. It's really the institutions that must shoulder some of the blame for not also conducting their due diligence.

afrojack123 6y ago

Its good to see that American tax dollars are no longer being used to help a country trying to undermine America.

av_engr 6y ago

This is kind of off-topic since the issue was these scientists lying about their ties to a foreign government. I wanted to address how people think there's no IP theft here. Although results and information about the research are often published to the public, experimental setup and some technical details are usually not included in the publication. Just because a paper on the research will eventually be available to the public doesn't mean the technology can be easily replicated. The concern here is that the real hard work that comes from months of trial and error is being stolen to competing nations that would take advantage of the theft to claim the author of such technology. Not to mention the tech is funded by American taxpayer dollars and developed by scientists who spent years and months on it. There's a recent incident on a Chinese Scientist lying about his affiliation with the Chinese Military and have been sending proprietary lab information to China. See: https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2020/06/11/alleged-chinese-spy-arrested-at-lax-arrested-for-stealing-research-from-uc-san-francisco/ https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2020/06/11/alleged-chinese...