耶鲁大学医学院林海帆教授被司法部调查：又一科学猎巫案？
【注：耶鲁大学医学院著名干细胞专家林海帆教授被美国司法部调查而被停职，其研究工作也转交给他人。司法部对林教授的指控和其他类似案件相同，即没有清楚地交代和中国研究机构的关系。虽然目前司法部没有提到此案和“中国倡议（China Initiative）”的关系，但此案和诸多类似案件的相似性令人怀疑这又是一起和“中国倡议”有关的科技猎巫行动。近100名耶鲁大学教师签署了一封关注信后，耶鲁大学回复表示，它正在为这位细胞生物学教授辩护，同时进行内部调查。以下是发布在耶鲁新闻（Yale News）校刊上关于耶鲁大学教师的关切信和校方的回复信的报道】
2022年3月16日
教职工报道
耶鲁新闻（Yale News）
在一个可能与“中国倡议（China Initiative)”有关的司法部调查中，耶鲁大学华裔教授林海帆已被停职，耶鲁大学已承诺为林教授发声。
3 月 9 日，耶鲁大学近 100 名教职员工致信大学校长彼得萨洛维（Peter Salovey），质询耶鲁大学在没有明显正当程序的情况下暂停了细胞生物学教授兼耶鲁大学干细胞中心主任林海凡的职务。信中称，林教授在没有法律指控或不当行为的明确证据的情况下被停职，其研究也突然中断。这封信称事态发展“在多个层面上令人不安”，并指出2022年一月NIH提供给校方的信息和林教授提供的消息明显不符，校方已经在进行内部调查。这封信认为林教授的案子和司法部“中国倡议（China Initiative）”有关，称该倡议不公平地针对华裔科学家，损害了美国的研究。
信中写道，“我们认为，在没有正当程序和明确的不当行为证据的情况下，耶鲁大学对林教授的行政行为似乎表明，校方在自己的教职员工被证明无罪之前就认定了其有罪；如果是这样，每个人都会很脆弱”。
作为对这封信的回应，大学教务长 Scott Strobel 和医学院院长 Nancy Brown 周三早上回复了信件的签署人。他们的回复描述了 2019 年 3 月美国国立卫生研究院（NIH）关于“外部支持报告的充分性”的调查，该调查由 NIH 资助的几位教员提供。耶鲁大学当时用包括林在内的教职员工提供的信息回答了这个问题。 回复信中写道，NIH随后质疑这些信息是否准确，并质疑耶鲁大学采取了原来的立场。
经过进一步的讨论，耶鲁大学于2020 年 7 月被告知司法部已遵守司法部的传票对此事展开刑事调查。 2021 年 3 月，司法部要求与林教授交谈，耶鲁大学聘请了单独的律师代表他。
2022 年 1 月，美国国立卫生研究院向耶鲁大学提供的信息与林提供的信息以及该大学的回应所依据的信息不一致，促使耶鲁大学进行了自己的内部调查。林教授被执行停职带薪和行政休假，调查仍在进行中。回复信称，大学在整个过程中“坚定地支持林教授”。
校方回复信中强调到目前为止校方尚未做出任何判断，并坚称耶鲁大学在整个调查过程中都遵循了正当程序，并将继续这样做。
目前尚不清楚司法部的行动是否属于“中国倡议”的范畴，该机构最近表示正在对其进行彻底改革。Strobel 和 Brown 的回应声明没有提到“中国倡议”。麻省理工学院的一项技术调查发现，美国司法部没有官方定义来标记中国倡议案件。同一项调查还发现，司法部越来越关注“研究诚信（research integrity）”案件，通常是因为未能充分披露与中国机构的所有关系。 “中国倡议”下的大多数科研诚信案件都已经失败，辩护律师和其他观察员批评联邦政府有关的规定不明确。
Strobel 和 Brown 指出，他们“敏锐地意识到”亚裔和亚裔美国科学家“近年来”所经历的痛苦、恐惧和压力。
他们写道：“虽然这种情况很少发生，但当一名教员接受调查时，这对教员以及那些支持和关心我们同事的福祉和成果的人来说是令人痛苦的”。 “我们敏锐地意识到这些挑战。我们非常感谢您对我们同事的关心和忧虑。这证明了非凡的合作精神和协作精神，这是我们校园社区的标志。”
对于多次置评请求林教授没有回应。林的直接研究小组成员以及这封信的组织者也没有回应置评请求。
耶鲁大学传播副总裁内特尼克森（Nate Nickerson）写信给耶鲁新闻，该大学“致力于”学术自由原则，并遵守教师手册中的所有政策。
100名教职工的原始信件尚未公开，主要在医学院和文理学院的一些科学和工程系的个别教职员工中传播。
“我担心我的同事林海凡没有得到适当的正当程序，”与干细胞中心有关的文理学院参议院主席瓦莱丽·霍斯利 (Valerie Horsley) 在给耶鲁新闻的一封电子邮件中写道。 “我不清楚他为什么被停职，特别是如果他没有被指控犯罪或违反了大学的政策。他在耶鲁大学干细胞中心和他自己的实验室中的领导力激发并激励了我自己的工作，我想确保我们在我们的机构中保留这位重要的领导者。”
林教授从事的研究是关于干细胞的自我更新机制，他于 2006 年来到耶鲁并建立了干细胞中心，该组织拥有 100 多个成员实验室，被广泛认为是该国最杰出的此类研究中心之一。 他是美国科学院成员，最近被选为国际干细胞研究学会的主席。林先生目前也是上海科技大学的兼职院长。
签署这封信的六位教授拒绝接受采访，理由是缺乏关于林教授的可靠信息。另外五人在新闻中支持林，但也强调他们并不认识林。过去与林共事的三名教授表示，自从林教授被停职以来，他们没有与他联系过，但从同事那里听说，林被禁止进入他的实验室，并被指示不要联系他的研究生研究人员。干细胞中心的临时主任已被任命，林的系主任已承诺支持林计划中任何受影响的学生，这将得到 YSM 的过渡资金支持。
林的许多同事都称赞他的领导能力和对细胞生物学领域的先进贡献。神经科学教授 Daniel Colón-Ramos 和其他几位细胞生物学教授评论说，林在该领域的贡献涉及果蝇和其他生物体的干细胞分裂，并且似乎不会引起联邦政府对国家安全的关注。
尽管如此，林教授的停职是在科学研究的敏感时期之后发生的，特别是对于华裔科学家而言。几位教授呼回应了这封教职员工的信，援引了针对麻省理工学院陈刚教授提起的备受瞩目的“中国倡议”案件。陈刚教授于 2021 年 1 月被捕，被指控隐瞒与中国政府的关系，并被禁止进入校园和他的研究项目。一年后，陈教授的所有指控被撤销，但那时他的研究已经停滞，他的博士后研究人员已被转移到其他小组。
正如大学内的许多人描述了“中国倡议”对科学探究产生的“寒蝉”影响，包括林教授在内的近 200 名教职员工曾签署了一封致司法部的公开信，呼吁在 1 月份结束该倡议。司法部在 2 月下旬宣布了对该倡议的更改，包括取消其名称。
100名教职工在信中强调，教师不知道林的停学是否反映了陈刚的案件，但如果他正在接受政府机构的调查，呼吁大学保护林教授。并指出麻省理工学院在整个案件中始终为陈提供法律支持。最终，这封信呼吁大学管理人员采取三个具体步骤：根据教师手册中的所有指导方针恢复林教授的工作，为停职教师的政策提供更大的透明度，并保护教授免受政府机构的不当政治压力和调查。
“对我们中的许多人来说，现在是治愈伤口的时候，是从对我们学术生活造成的巨大伤害中恢复过来，重新专注于追求卓越的学术，并重新对自由、平等和公平的理想充满信心的时候 ”。呼吁信指出，对林教授的无端惩罚将“产生强烈的寒蝉效应，并在耶鲁大学教师中传播新的焦虑浪潮。”
Colón-Ramos 表示，即使林的停职与“中国倡议”无关，这种焦虑也会加剧，因为在充满不确定性的情况下，研究人员可能不太愿意与华裔科学家和中国大学合作，从而破坏整体研究环境。
“他是我认识的最杰出的科学家之一，一个正直的人，拥有无可指责的科学成就记录”，Colón-Ramos 说。 “这与我对林教授的了解完全一致，他们将一无所获，但与此同时，他们将真正伤害他的实验室，以及清楚此事的博士后、研究生、初级教员，”
中国倡议于2018年宣布。
附：耶鲁新闻报道原文
Yale School of Medicine Professor Haifan Lin investigated by Department of Justice
Following a letter of concern signed by nearly 100 Yale faculty, the University said that it is defending the cell biology professor while conducting an internal investigation.
ISAAC YU 2:13 AM, MAR 16, 2022
STAFF REPORTER
A School of Medicine professor has been suspended amid a Department of Justice investigation that may be related to the China Initiative. The University has pledged to vigorously advocate on the professor’s behalf.
A March 9 letter addressed to University President Peter Salovey, and signed by nearly 100 Yale faculty members, claimed that the University suspended Haifan Lin, professor of cell biology and director of Yale’s Stem Cell Center, without apparent due process. Lin has been placed on involuntary administrative leave and “abruptly cut off” from his research group, the letter alleged, without legal charges or clear evidence of misconduct. The letter raised questions about whether Lin is under investigation by a governmental agency, emphasized a lack of known facts regarding why actions were taken against Lin and called the developments “disturbing on many levels.” The letter also places Lin’s case against the backdrop of the China Initiative, a Department of Justice anti-espionage effort that critics say harms research and unfairly targets scientists of Chinese descent.
“In our view, without due process and clear evidence of misconduct, Yale’s administrative action in the case of Prof. Lin appears to suggest that Yale’s own faculty members are guilty until proven innocent; and if so, everyone will be vulnerable,” the letter, obtained by the News, reads.
In response to the letter, University Provost Scott Strobel and School of Medicine Dean Nancy Brown wrote to faculty signatories early Wednesday morning. Their response describes a March 2019 inquiry from the National Institutes of Health regarding “the sufficiency of reporting of outside support” by several faculty funded by NIH grants. The University responded to the questioning with information provided by faculty including Lin. NIH subsequently questioned whether the information was accurate, and the University took the position that it was, the letter reads.
After continued discussions, in July 2020, the University was notified that the Department of Justice had opened a criminal investigation into the matter, and complied with the DOJ’s subpoena. In March 2021, the DOJ requested to speak with Lin, and the University retained separate counsel to represent him.
In January 2022, the NIH provided Yale with information that appeared inconsistent with the information that Lin had provided and that the University had based its response on, prompting the University to conduct its own internal investigation. Lin has been placed on paid administrative leave, and the investigation is ongoing. The University has “acted assertively to support Professor Lin” throughout the process, the response states.
The response emphasizes that no judgments have been made so far, and maintains that the University has followed due process throughout the investigation and will continue to do so.
It is unclear whether the DOJ’s actions fall under the umbrella of the China Initiative, which the agency recently said is being overhauled. Strobel and Brown’s response statement does not reference the China Initiative. An investigation by the M.I.T. Technology Review found that the DOJ does not have an official definition under which it labels China Initiative cases. The same investigation also found that the DOJ has increasingly focused on cases of “research integrity”, typically failure to fully disclose all ties to Chinese institutions. The majority of research integrity cases under the China Initiative have fallen apart, and defense attorneys and other observers criticize the federal government’s rules regarding disclosure as unclear.
Strobel and Brown do note that they are “acutely aware of the pain, fear, and stress” that Asian and Asian American scientists have experienced in “recent years”.
“While it happens rarely, when a faculty member is subjected to an investigation, it is distressing to the faculty member and to those who support and care about our colleague’s well-being and productivity,” they wrote. “We are keenly aware of these challenges. We greatly appreciate your care and concern for our colleague. It is a testament to the extraordinary spirit of collegiality and collaboration that is a hallmark of our campus community.”
Lin did not respond to multiple requests for comment. Members of Lin’s direct research group, as well as the letter’s organizers, also did not respond to requests for comment.
Yale Vice President of Communications Nate Nickerson wrote to the News that the University is “committed” to principles of academic freedom and follows all policies in the Faculty Handbook.
The original letter, which has not been made public, circulated among individual faculty members, primarily in the School of Medicine and some science and engineering departments in the Faculty of Arts & Sciences.
“I am concerned that my colleague Haifan Lin is not being given appropriate due process,” Valerie Horsley, the chair of the Faculty of Arts & Sciences Senate who is associated with the Stem Cell Center and one of the letter’s signatories, wrote in an email to the News. “It is not clear to me why he is on leave, especially if he has not been charged with a crime or has gone against a University policy. His leadership in Yale’s Stem Cell Center and in his own laboratory have inspired and motivated my own work and I want to make sure that we retain this important leader at our Institution.”
Lin, whose research examines the self-renewing mechanism of stem cells, came to Yale in 2006 and established the Stem Cell Center, an organization with over 100 member labs that is widely recognized as one of the country’s most prominent centers for such research. He is a member of the National Academy of Sciences and was recently elected as president of the International Society of Stem Cell Research. Lin is also currently an adjunct dean at ShanghaiTech University.
Six professors who signed the letter declined to be interviewed, citing a lack of substantiated information about Lin’s circumstances. Five others spoke to the News in support of Lin but also emphasized that they did not personally know Lin. Three professors who have worked with Lin in the past said they have not had contact with him since the apparent suspension, but heard from colleagues that Lin was barred from his lab and instructed not to contact his graduate researchers. An interim director of the Stem Cell Center has been appointed, and the chair of Lin’s department has pledged to support any affected students in Lin’s program, which will be supported by bridge funding from YSM.
Many of Lin’s colleagues praised both his leadership skills and advanced contributions to the field of cell biology. Daniel Colón-Ramos, a professor of neuroscience, as well as several other professors of cell biology remarked that Lin’s contributions to the field involve stem cell division in fruit flies and other organisms, and would not appear to be of concern to federal inquiries on national security.
Still, Lin’s suspension comes on the heels of a sensitive period of time for scientific research, particularly for scientists of Chinese descent. Echoing the faculty letter, several professors invoked a high-profile China Initiative case brought against Gang Chen at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Chen was arrested in January 2021, accused of concealing ties to the Chinese government and barred from campus and his research projects. Chene was ultimately cleared on all charges a year later, but by then his research had stalled and his postdoctoral researchers had been transferred to other groups.
As many across the University described the “chilling” effects that the China Initiative has had on scientific inquiry, nearly 200 faculty members — including Lin — signed onto an open letter to the Justice Department, calling for the Initiative’s end in January. The Department of Justice announced changes to the initiative, including dropping its name, in late February.
The original letter emphasized that faculty did not know whether Lin’s suspension mirrors Chen’s case, but called on the University to protect Lin if he is under investigation by a governmental agency, noting M.I.T’s consistent legal support for Chen throughout his case. Ultimately, the letter calls on University administrators to take three specific steps: reinstate Lin according to all guidelines in the Faculty Handbook, provide greater transparency regarding policies on suspended faculty and protect professors from undue political pressure and investigations from governmental agencies.
“For many of us, it is the time to heal the wounds, to recover from the great damage done to our academic life, to refocus on striving for academic excellence, and to regain faith in the ideals of freedom, equality, and fairness,” the letter states. Lin’s apparent punishment, it continues, will “have strong chilling effects and propagate a new wave of anxiety among Yale faculty.”
Such anxiety will rise even if Lin’s suspension has no connection to the China Initiative, Colón-Ramos said, because researchers may be less inclined to collaborate with scientists of Chinese descent and Chinese universities amid the uncertainty, damaging the overall research environment.
“He’s one of the most brilliant scientists I know, a person of great integrity with an unimpeachable scientific record of achievements,” Colón-Ramos said. “It would be completely consistent with what I know about [Lin] that they would find absolutely nothing, but in the meantime, they will have really hurt his lab, and the postdocs, graduate students, junior faculty that are seeing what’s happening,”
The China Initiative was announced in 2018.
评论
发表评论