SAN FRANCISCO—A leading genetics science journal has retracted 18 papers written by Chinese authors. It was the largest mass retraction to date due to concerns about human rights violations.
All the retracted papers were published between 2019 and 2021 in the genetics journal Molecular Genetics & Genomic Medicine (MGGM), published by the U.S. academic publishing company Wiley.
The mass retraction was made through an agreement between the journal’s editor-in-chief, Suzanne Hart, and Wiley Periodicals LLC, after an investigation that found “inconsistencies between the consent documentation and the research reported,” according to the retraction documentation.
In several cases, DNA samples used in research were collected from minority ethnic groups, including Tibetans, Uyghurs, and Mongolians, populations deemed by experts and human rights campaigners to be vulnerable to exploitation and oppression in China.
Currently some of the retracted papers can still be visited on Wiley Online Library, with retraction notices and watermarks on each page.
In one retracted paper published in February 2021, DNA samples from 120 unrelated Tibetan individuals were used.
Four in eight co-authors of the paper work for various public security departments. Cheng Zhang, the second co-author, was listed as an official of the Center for Material Evidence, Tibet Autonomous Region Public Security, Lhasa, Tibet, China.
Other retracted papers only show the retraction itself on Wiley Online Library. One paper published on June 14, 2020, on Wiley Online Library, used blood samples from 340 Uyghur individuals in Kashgar, Xinjiang to study the genetic links between them and Uyghurs from other regions.
“It was a relief to see that the ethically questionable articles were finally retracted,” Yves Moreau, a professor at the University of Leuven, Belgium, told The Epoch Times in an email.
Mr. Moreau was the one who raised concerns about these papers with Ms. Hart in March 2021.
“It is also frustrating that such a process took almost three years, while four to six months must be enough to carry out the necessary verifications and make a decision,” Mr. Moreau added.
The retracted papers provided consent forms as the journal required; however, the involvement of public security authorities “voids any notion of free informed consent,” Mr. Moreau said, according to Tibetan Review.
Mr. Moreau also expressed concern that the forensic genetics research in these papers could be used for DNA profiling and even persecution of ethnic minorities in China.
“This kind of research is problematic because it directly supports the reckless deployment of DNA database technology across China and often involves researchers with ties to the criminal justice apparatus,” Mr. Moreau told The Epoch Times.
Wiley’s retraction process requires that the author and, if necessary, the author’s institution be notified before the retraction goes public, Wiley’s website states.
Authors of 15 papers out of the 18 retracted ones responded that they disagree with the retraction of their papers. The authors of the other 3 papers were informed but did not respond, according to the retraction notices.
“It is however frustrating to see that such retractions do not simply result from applying well-established ethical standards,” Mr. Moreau said. “The involvement of the U.S. National Institutes of Health and of some members of the editorial board was most probably key to obtaining the retractions.”
Of 25 editorial board members of MGGM, 8 resigned after Mr. Moreau raised concerns, according to a report by The Intercept.
Mass retractions are rare because publishers are often reluctant to proceed with retractions, Mr. Moreau said.
“However, such retractions are essential because this is a penalty to which researchers pay real attention,” he said.
Researchers called for the immediate retraction of more than 400 scientific papers on transplantation because the organs were likely to have been obtained unethically from executed prisoners in China, according to a paper published in the journal BMJ Open in 2019.
To date, 40 papers on transplantation from China have been retracted, according to a retraction database website. Of these, 26 papers were retracted due to “Ethical Violations by Author.”
The first retracted paper of its kind, published in the journal Liver International in October 2016, was found to be affiliated with the Chinese communist regime’s systematic harvesting of the organs of prisoners of conscience, mainly practitioners of the spiritual discipline Falun Gong, who are subject to a violent campaign of persecution in China.
The paper analyzed 564 liver transplants at Zhejiang University’s First Affiliated Hospital from April 2010 to October 2014. Co-author Dr. Zheng Shusen wrote in a paper that he had carried out 46 “emergency” liver transplants from January 2000 to December 2004, indicating that forced donors from a living population of pre-screened individuals were executed on demand.
Mr. Moreau welcomes more efforts by organizations advocating for the rights of persecuted groups across China; such efforts often result in sporadic retractions.
“I only expect that scientific publishers will apply consistently the ethical standards to which they publicly subscribe,” Mr. Moreau said. “The public needs to realize that several scientific publishers are huge corporations with billions of dollars in yearly revenue. It is one of the most profitable businesses in the world.”
