Concerns have been raised that academic publishers are not doing enough to review the ethical standards of the research they publish, after a paper based on genetic data from the Uyghur population in China was retracted and questions were raised about several other papers, including one now published by Oxford. University Press.
In June, Dutch academic publisher Elsevier withdrew its article titled “Analysis of Uyghur and Kazakh populations using the Sensitive Identity Ancestor Panel” published in 2019.
In the study conducted by Chinese and Danish researchers, the use of genetic sequencing technology developed by the US biotechnology company Thermo Fisher Scientific on two minorities was evaluated using blood and saliva samples from 203 Uyghurs and Kazakhs living in Urumqi, the capital of Xinjiang. ethnic groups. Underlining the need for research, the authors suggested that better DNA sequencing could help police identify suspects in cases. “A clear knowledge of genetic variation is important for understanding the origins of ethnicity and demographic history of populations in Xinjiang… [which] may provide police with an investigative lead.”
The retraction notice stated that the article was withdrawn at the request of the journal Forensic Science International: Genetics, which published it, after a review revealed that relevant ethical approval for the collection of genetic samples had not been obtained.
Mark Munsterhjelm, a professor at the University of Windsor in Ontario who specializes in racism in genetic research, said the publication of the paper was “typical of a culture of informed complicity and unquestioning acceptance of ethics in forensic genetics.” Consent requests regarding vulnerable groups”.
Concerns were also raised about an article in a magazine sponsored by China’s justice ministry. The study, titled Sequencing human identity markers in a Uyghur population, analyzed Uyghur genetic data based on blood samples collected from individuals in the capital of Xinjiang, northwestern China. Yves Moreau, a professor of engineering at the University of Leuven in Belgium who focuses on DNA analysis, expressed concern that the subjects in the study may not have freely consented to the use of their DNA samples. He also argued that the research “allows for greater mass surveillance” of Uyghur people.
It appeared in the June 2022 issue of Forensic Sciences Research (FSR), which was acquired by Oxford University Press in 2023. The research was partially supported by a research grant from Xinjiang Police College and was written by three of the same scientists. like the retracted Elsevier article.
It has not been subject to formal ethical review by the journal’s editors or by OUP, which hosts the journal.
FSR’s editor-in-chief, Duarte Nuno Vieira, denied that financial support from China’s justice ministry had any influence on the magazine’s editorial policies, calling the proposal “ethically objectionable”.
Both articles are based on research conducted in Xinjiang, where there are widespread reports of human rights abuses. Along with the widespread system of detention camps, people in the region, mostly Uyghurs, Kazakhs and other ethnic minorities, are subject to high levels of state surveillance.
Uyghurs are a Turkic ethnic group who live mostly in Xinjiang, part of China, but whose ancestors came from Central Asia as well as China. They have long had a tense relationship with Beijing, which many accuse of wanting to break away from Chinese rule.
Experts say people in Xinjiang may not be able to freely consent to participate in research studies.
These concerns were further compounded by the fact that one of the researchers in both papers, Halimureti Simayijiang, was affiliated with China’s state security apparatus through the Xinjiang Police College.
Maya Wang, Deputy Asia Director at Human Rights Watch, said: “Given how challenging the overall environment is for Uyghurs [in China]Uighurs are unlikely to say no [to the collection of DNA].”
The Biden administration recently lifted sanctions on China’s public security ministry’s forensic science institute to facilitate cooperation on fentanyl control. The institute has been subject to sanctions since 2020 due to allegations of abuse against the Uyghur people.
Questions about links to China
On November 19, Moreau officially expressed concerns about the study of Uyghur DNA published in Forensic Science Research.
The article states that “written informed consent” was obtained from each of the 264 Uyghurs who gave blood samples. In an email to Oxford University vice-chancellor Irene Tracey and seen by the Guardian, Moreau said: “The standard of informed consent is free informed consent,” arguing that this is impossible in the context of Xinjiang.
An OUP spokesperson stated that the article was accepted and published by FSR before OUP began publishing the journal. They said: “While the article has been peer-reviewed and ethical research statements and disclosures are included on the article page, we will work with the journal’s editors to investigate the concerns raised and the information we receive.”
The authors of the paper are listed as Simayijiang, Niels Morling and Claus Børsting from the department of forensic genetics at the University of Copenhagen. It is stated that Simayijiang is jointly affiliated with the Xinjiang Police College. These three scientists, along with data scientist Torben Tvedebrink, are authors of the paper that was retracted by Elsevier in June.
The University of Copenhagen said Simayijiang, who left in 2020, was no longer affiliated with the university. Both the retracted article and the article in which Moreau expressed concerns were submitted before Simayijiang left the university.
Nuno Vieira said FSR was “completely impartial and transparent” and that the journal’s editorial board included “some of the world’s most well-known and respected forensic experts and academics”.
He said he would highlight ethical concerns with relevant staff at the magazine, adding: “There was never (I repeat, never) any intervention or action from the Chinese justice ministry.”
Hans Bräuner, Deputy Dean for Research at the Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences at the University of Copenhagen, said the university has taken a number of measures to improve controls since concerns about the ethics of data collection in Xinjiang were first raised in 2020. Regarding sensitive research, including the establishment of a data management unit and security checklist for risk assessments of international research.
Two other articles on Uyghur and Kazakh genetic data by Simayijiang, Morling and Børsting, and fourth author Vania Pereira, also from the University of Copenhagen, are under formal ethical review by the journal in which they were published. Bräuner said his faculty was only made aware of concerns about these papers, published in December in the journal Forensic Sciences International: Genetics, but has been in contact with the journal’s editor-in-chief to clarify the issue.
None of the researchers responded to requests for comment.
Experts say the papers are the tip of an iceberg of scientific research that may not meet ethical standards for data collection and, in some cases, could help develop surveillance technologies that could be used to violate human rights, especially among minority groups.
Thermo Fisher, owner of the DNA sequencing kit evaluated in the article that was retracted in June, said it would stop selling its equipment in Xinjiang in 2019.
In recent years, there has been increased scrutiny of scientific research in China that relies on material obtained from populations who do not have the opportunity to give free consent, particularly ethnic minorities. Bioethicists first began voicing concerns in 2019, leading reputable journals to retract many papers based on minority genetic material.
Scientists say publishers are still too willing to accept research that may raise ethical concerns and too slow to respond to complaints.
Moreau expressed concern about dozens of articles. In November, he was awarded the Einstein Foundation award for his “compelling” defense of “ethical standards in the use of human DNA data,” according to the jury committee.
According to Moreau’s analysis, more than 20% of research on forensic population genetics published in China between 2011 and 2018 focused on Uyghurs, even though they make up less than 1% of the population. Tibetans’ “surveillance rate” is even higher.
“While Uyghurs are interesting to study from a genetic perspective because they are a mixed population with both East Asian and Eurasian heritage, and Tibetans are also interesting because of their adaptation to high altitude, research on these groups is surprisingly intense,” Moreau said.
A spokesman for the Chinese government said: “China is a country governed by law. “The privacy of all Chinese citizens, regardless of their ethnicity, is protected by law.”