Thread by @dgurdasani1

This statement by the @sangerinstitute is categorically false. It did allow the manufacture of a product without ethics and consent. Thread below 1/N sanger.ac.uk/news/view/sang…

@sangerinstitute 1. the press release does not address the issue of ethics and consent- it did manufacture a product without ethics, consents or legal agreements in place (their own due diligence suggested shared IP). Here's excerpts from their own due diligence in May 2017 that show this. 2/N

@sangerinstitute 2. The Sanger say they had no intent to commercialise - this is untrue. I have several emails to this effect, but here's an excerpt from the Sanger's own document. Commercialisation in itself would not have been problematic had they sought to involve institutes in discussions.

@sangerinstitute 3. Indeed here's an excerpt from their purchase order that makes clear that they would receive a milestone fee in return. But they didn't - only because whistleblowers and African institutions intervened. It clearly also refers to future commercialisation

@sangerinstitute 4. Sanger say they were cleared in an independent investigation. Here are excerpts from the extremely redacted full report we received. This makes it clear that ruling on the legality and ethics was outside the scope of the investigation & this wasn't actually assessed at all.

@sangerinstitute 5.The Sanger say this was one researchers idea that they didn't follow. Categorically false. The lead of the Africa programme, also a whistleblower who lost his job raised serious concerns repeatedly asking the head of human genetics and COO not to move ahead but he was ignored

@sangerinstitute 6. In truth we submitted many formal complaints to ask them not to go ahead. Three board of members made the decision to move ahead with this - including the head of human genetics, the COO, and the head of Legal. They informed their UK collaborator but not the African ones.

@sangerinstitute 7. Not only did all this happen, subsequently Sanger tried to make it look like the whistleblowers were actually responsible for this in documents submitted to institutions! This corruption runs really deep. Sadly @JeremyFarrar at
@wellcometrust was fully aware, and did nothing

@sangerinstitute @JeremyFarrar @wellcometrust 8. 2 of us were terminated. I was dismissed for essentially writing an email to a collaborator outlining the detriment I had suffered as a result of whistleblowing. I was told that this 'brought the institute into disrepute', and it did not matter whether my email was factual.

@sangerinstitute @JeremyFarrar @wellcometrust 9. Also Sanger made sure I didn't get a position in Cambridge either. While the head of dept at the Uni of Cambridge was very supportive, the Regius of the clinical school intervened and said I could not transfer their as Sanger would not give me a good reference.

@sangerinstitute @JeremyFarrar @wellcometrust Just to say that I'm very happy where I am in London now- the culture is very supportive and fosters young researchers. I commute four hours a day, but it's worth it not to be in the toxic culture that the Sanger had become. The last two years came at a huge cost for many of us.

@sangerinstitute @JeremyFarrar @wellcometrust unroll @threadreaderapp

@sangerinstitute @JeremyFarrar @wellcometrust @threadreaderapp The saddest part of this is that ultimately its African research, and African communities that suffer. Trust with researchers and science suffers. Funding for research suffers. The
@sangerinstitute
also ended the Africa programme with the termination of whistleblowers

@sangerinstitute @JeremyFarrar @wellcometrust @threadreaderapp Many amazing programmes, including the genome diversity in Africa project ended, and all staff from our team connected to these were made redundant. The arrays sold were never used. They're still lying in Sanger warehouses.

@sangerinstitute @JeremyFarrar @wellcometrust @threadreaderapp unroll
@threadreaderapp