Nature Medicine | Spoonful of Medicine

Trouble in the HIV field

When I went to the HIV vaccine meeting in Whistler last month, I heard some rather disturbing tales of people upset at the NIH. Some of the behind the scenes complaining I wrote about here. The rest became a news story about conflicts between HIV scientists and the NIH that runs in our May issue.

Before I wrote it, some scientists privately asked me not to write it, saying it would only stir up more trouble in the field. Others assumed—wrongly—that the story would be based on the complaints of only a few disgruntled researchers. But in fact, the discontentment is widespread, and CHAVI, the NIH’s HIV vaccine project, is perhaps unfairly bearing the brunt.

Even those who have little to do with HIV vaccines seem to be aware of the swirling bitterness. It’s understandable that CHAVI is stirring up resentment when established scientists are having to downsize their labs and young researchers are giving up on science, says Paul Bieniasz, who works at the Aaron Diamond AIDS Research Center in New York.

Bieniasz serves as chair of an NIH study section on AIDS molecular and cellular biology, so he has seen first hand the effect of the tightening budget on the peer review process. Like many others I quoted when CHAVI was first launched, he doesn’t believe sinking $350 million into one project is the way to solve the vaccine challenge. But unlike most of the people I tried to speak to for the most recent article, he was willing to go on the record.

“What if they’re (CHAVI is) wrong?” he says. “People have to speak out, we shouldn’t be living in an environment of fear.”

So… how about it? Here’s your chance to break out of the environment of fear…

Comments

  1. Report this comment

    Mario Stevenson said:

    When the CHAVI first appeared, I thought it was a big mistake and a misuse of research money. One year later, I still think so. I also suspect that many questions being addressed with CHAVI funding are also being addressed by GATES Foundation support and the issue of overlap needs to be addressed. When basic AIDS research is being decimated by tight paylines and shrinking funds, the fact that the CHAVI exists is galling. I don’t fault the investigators for applying for CHAVI funding. I blame NIH leadership for allowing the CHAVI to exist in the first place.

  2. Report this comment

    AIDSdoc20892 said:

    Peggy Johnston and Jose Esparza are now spitting blood and breathing fire about Apoorva Mandavilli’s Nat Med article on the problems with the CHAVI. The vaccine field is well and truly fractured and this Blogger is far from alone in concern for its future. It’s time for a change but this won’t ever happen while Jose and Peggy are in charge of international AIDS vaccine strategy or what passes for it. These two officals have far too much personally invested in the current power structure to ever admit there’s a need for change let alone allow it. They and their clique control access of information to Tony Fauci and Toshi Yamada who don’t ever seem to do due diligence and find out how bad the situation really is nowadays. The only way I can see for reform to happen is for an independent enquiry by Congress. A few subpoenas might shake loose the truth. Some well targeted FOIA requests from the Washington Post would also help. Mandavilli’s article only scrapes the surface of the problems. The CHAVI grant review was cooked to make sure Peggy’s good buddy Bart Haynes came out the winner. The decision was taken before a single word was written on any grant application. It’s all about control, who controls the field, and that sort of NIH money was never going to go anywhere Peggy couldn’t control, with Jose’s help. Testimony on oath by some senior NIH officials would be very interesting to hear if they repeat what’s been going round the halls here. The Gates foundation’s every bit as bad. Jose and Peggy shamelessly manipulated the vaccine grant competition to make sure their friends got the money and their enemies got the shaft. Again, all about control. It’s hardly a shock that officials manipulate the system, but what’s really and truly bad is how these two hit their enemies, killing their grants, harming their careers. The back stabbing is killing the field, destroying cooperation, creating resentment and fear. Freedom of speech only seems to work if you agree with the ruling clique. It’s intolerable that the best scientists in the field are now sacred of political assassination. Anyone who thinks doesn’t happen is naive. I’ve seen it happen and so have my friends here. Some of us would be pretty happy to get hit with a FOIA or a subpoena so we can tell the truth without getting fired.

    Making an AIDS vaccine is hard enough without Jose and Peggy making it more difficult. They have split an already political field, by favoring a clique so much, and all for personal ambition and egos. In the name of the Lord God Almighty it’s got to stop! It’s time for these two to go before even more harm is done to the field. Threatening the research programs of the world’s best AIDS scientists can’t be allowed to happen any longer. The Bush regime is full of control freaks but I never thought I’d ever see the same sort of behavior in science. That I should live this long!

  3. Report this comment

    vacc mann said:

    very interesting post from AIDSdoc, heard much the same myself when the story appeared. also heard a while back that jose esparza tried to blame bill gates personally for grant funding decision abuses jose and peggy cooked up between the two of them at the bmgf. deflecting attention away from his guilty success i guess. maybe bill g should also be doing some due diligence into how his employees operate.