A Mexican Issue

1. A Mexican Issue The interests of Mexican Science and Young Scientists should be the primary objective of CONACyT

2. The Mexican Science community should study closely the case of IPICyT

3. The Mexican Science community should study closely the case of IPICyT The most prestigious NanoTechnology Research program in Mexico has been liquidated

4. The Mexican Science community should study closely the case of IPICyT The most prestigious NanoTechnology Research program in Mexico has been liquidated The group had 2 senior scientists 25 students and 5 technicians

5. The Mexican Science community should study closely the case of IPICyT The most prestigious NanoTechnology Research program in Mexico has been liquidated The group had 2 senior scientists 25 students and 5 technicians The 2 Senior scientists and 17 students have left Mexico and only 2 technicians remain

6. An international group of 75 eminent scientists was asked for help when the problems that arose in 2008 at IPICyT could not be resolved internally.

7. An international group of 75 eminent scientists was asked for help when the problems that arose in 2008 at IPICyT could not be resolved internally. What particularly concerned the International group was clear evidence that vulnerable young people where being harassed

8. An international group of 75 eminent scientists was asked for help when the problems that arose in 2008 at IPICyT could not be resolved internally. What particularly concerned the International group was clear evidence that vulnerable young people where being harassed Recorded evidence of harassment has been placed on the web and indeedone event was even witnessed directly by a senior visitinginternational scientist.

9. An international group of 75 eminent scientists was asked for help when the problems that arose in 2008 at IPICyT could not be resolved internally. What particularly concerned the International group was clear evidence that vulnerable young people where being harassed Recorded evidence of harassment has been placed on the web and indeedone event was even witnessed directly by a senior visitinginternational scientist. The International group deemed this treatment to be outrageous for which there is no excuse

10. The student’s side of the story http://cienciayrevolucion.blogspot.com/

12. The student’s side of the story http://cienciayrevolucion.blogspot.com/

13. IPICyT The Mexican Science community should look carefully into the general implications of the circumstances surrounding the disbandment of the NanosScience and NanoTechnology (N&N) Research Initiative at IPICyt in San Luis Potosi In 2008 when the various problems that had arisen were not resolved internally but gradually became more and more serious the Group leaders asked for advice and help from an international group of distinguished scientists (some 75 altogether)

14. This international group tried very hard since 2008 to encourage the parties involved to resolve their disagreements internally. Unfortunately the sitautaion was exacerbated and the results has been wholesale disintegration. Vulnerable students appear to have been harassed and recorded evidence of harrassment has been placed on the web and indeedone event has even witnessed directly by a senior visitinginternational scientist. The group leaders have now been dismissed and further intimidating threats issued towards their students and technical staff

15. The present situation is that the two senior scientists have left Mexico to take up positions abroad In January  2010 there were 22 students in the N&N group, 17 of whom signed letters in support of their supervisors’ position We understand that those who did not sign may have done so for fear of reprisals as they felt particularly vulnerable due to their family responsibilities

16. 14 of the students have now left Mexico to study aboard, 2 got their PhD (one of them with the help of a lawyer) 6 students are left at IPICYT!! Of the original 5 technicians due the harassment now there are just 2!

17. In summary as a pokesperson for the international group I shall not comment on rights or wrongs of the reasons for this unfortunate sequence – I suggest this should be the focus of an independent senior inquiry by a group of senior Mexican Scientist

18. However I think it is appropriate to make the following observations: a) The IPICyT group had become, in a very short period, one of the most productive, prestigious research programmes in N&N with a enviable international reputation for excellence.

19. b) No country can afford to lose such an intiative in one of the most competitive and promising field with major value to the Mexico and Mexico’s students.

20. c) Finally what the international community finds intolerable and impossible to pass over without comment is that whatever the reasons the treatment of vulnerable students and junior staff appears truly outrageous

21. Dear Harry, We think that it is important to let the people know about our bad experience at IPICYT (IPICYT is a CONACYT center) in your next trip to Mexico. We, as Mexicans, feel devastated of what happened, and continues happening to our students and colleagues. It is not stopping and it is getting worse every time! You and closer members of the scientific community knew that we had difficulties at IPICYT and that we tried to solve them; you and some others participated in trying to find a solution. The international scientific community and the general public should be informed: In particular, the decision makers of Latin-American countries which share several things in common to Mexico. Our experience should not be repeated under any circumstance. 1.- After finishing our PhD’s in Britain we returned to Mexico to strengthen nanosciences and nanotechnology. We, with the help of other colleagues started a world class laboratory in which students could study theory and experiment in the right multidisciplinary atmosphere with a flux of visiting researchers and visiting students both ways. The first graduate program in nanosciences and nanotechnology in the country started at IPICYT. Around 20 students have finished their PhDs in this program. Unfortunately, now after several years of difficulties, other 20 students have decided to leave the country to study abroad and perhaps, will never return. Our countries have a huge potential in young people who must have the right conditions to flourish.

22. 2.- Characterization equipment for nanosciences and nanotechnology is very expensive and difficult to get, especially in developing countries. Through competition, several grants were approved and world class equipment was obtained. Unfortunately, as happens often in our countries, it took a lot of time to install some of them. A High Resolution Transmission Electron Microscope with cost of 1.5 million dollars (top in Latin-America and fifth in the world) was in boxes for four years and the complete installation took five years. The international community (via scientific collaborations) played a crucial role to diminish the impact of not having the equipment installed since students and researchers could travel to several places to analyze samples or perform experiments. We are very grateful to all of them.

23. 3.- Despite doing good science, publishing scientific papers in international journals, teaching students and forming PhD’s, having collaborations nationally and internationally, and giving good visibility to IPICYT, politics and envy destroyed our group and all our efforts. Our grants were taken from us and we do not know what happened with the resources left or how many of our ideas are being used by others. There a lot of pseudo-scientists who have damaged and are damaging Mexican science. 4.- CONACYT (the Mexican NSF) controls all science in the country, even a big portion of the salaries of scientists, so when CONACYT decides that you are a problem, everybody is afraid to intervene. We talked to several high ranked people in universities, research centers and Mexican scientific organizations, before and after we were unjustifiably fired from IPICYT, and they did nothing or could not do anything. Even, we tried to get positions in the country and nothing happened, we were blocked to find a job in Mexico. This atmosphere forced us to leave the country with our Families and with a huge effort of more than 15 years left behind and more than 10 million USD in equipment and running grants. In Mexico, the freedom of speech, the freedom of exposing different ideas and to criticize to make things better is not tolerated. It is not possible to do good science, or any other activity, if your elementary rights are not respected and protected by the authority.

24. 5.- You and 70-100 other scientists wrote to the President of Mexico in June 2008 telling him, with the evidence you had, about the situation at IPICYT and you never got a response. After insisting CONACYT, you obtained a meeting with the CONACYT Director Juan Carlos Romero Hicks on 23 September 2008. To our surprise, your participation in that meeting, even the agreements you reached, did not appear in the minute. We realized that the minute was drafted by the director of IPICYT and then corrected by the deputy director of CONACYT, but never was distributed among the participants after we complained. 6.- Your suggestion and the recommendation of others, of establishing a disinterested enquiry committee to analyze the situation of IPICYT did not take place fully, since CONACYT appointed the people they wanted (obviously unconditional) and left just two members out of eight with no conflict of interest. Others disinterested members were left out. This lead to another issue you raised in the meeting with Romero Hicks, and supported apparently by the “disinterested commission”: the creation of an independent unit of excellence for nanoscience and nanotechnology in which we could work without distraction in the right atmosphere that science requires. This idea was manipulated by CONACYT and the director of IPICYT to conclude that the unit was more a menace than a way of achieving a goal which could be replicated in the country to benefit society. In Latin-American countries, we have a continuous fight every day: The fight of excellence against mediocrity. Unfortunately, mediocrity wins most of the time.

25. 7.- We have been victims of fabrication, mediocrity, lack of democracy, corruption, conspiracy and obscure interests that oppose science. The attitude of high officials in our countries must change toward science if we really want science to have an impact and to benefit our society. Our society more than ever is afraid not only of walking in the streets but of the government and its institutions. 8.- The director of IPICYT is going to finish his term this month (November) but can be re-appointed by the President of Mexico. People should know that a change at IPICYT is imperative if the same “policy” continues for another five years, the damage to the institution will be irreversible and will spread to others. Our message in short is: 1.- Support young people and promote collaborations. Allow different disciplines in the collaboration (Multidisciplinary research). 2.- Scientific decisions at the government level should involve real scientists not “pseudo-scientists”. Politics and religion are not compatible with science. 3.- Enforce the human rights. Most of the times not respected in developing countries. 4.- Politicians must be really convinced that science is important and plays a crucial role in the economic development of a nation. This is only achieved with more and high quality education and excellence. Yours sincerely, Humberto and Mauricio Terrones. Mexican scientists.