TG-1 * Transgallaxys Forum 1

Advanced search  


We are Allaxys
We moved our news front to

The Forum 1 on is only a backup archive!

Twin Update 8.5.2023

Warning to Amazon Data Services Singapore
Warning to Amazon Data Services Japan
Do stop your sabotage or you will be shot!

Pages: [1]

Author Topic: Publish and perish at Imperial College London: the death of Stefan Grimm  (Read 2103 times)


  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 7

This I took from Prof. David. Colquhoun's web-site. The format is spoiled and the quotations are spoiled. 

This is science in UK.

And Grimm is dead.

Read it and weep.

DC's Improbable Science
Truth, falsehood and evidence: investigations of dubious and dishonest science
Publish and perish at Imperial College London: the death of Stefan Grimm
Posted by David Colquhoun   

This week’s Times Higher Education carried a report of the death, at age 51, of Professor Stefan Grimm: Imperial College London to ‘review procedures’ after death of academic. He was professor of toxicology in the Faculty of Medicine at Imperial.


Now Stefan Grimm is dead. Despite having a good publication record, he failed to do sufficiently expensive research, so he was fired (or at least threatened with being fired).

    “Speaking to Times Higher Education on condition of anonymity, two academics who knew Professor Grimm, who was 51, said that he had complained of being placed under undue pressure by the university in the months leading up to his death, and that he had been placed on performance review.”

Having had cause to report before on bullying at Imperial’s Department of Medicine, I was curious to know more.

It is my understanding that the interim head of his department had written to Grimm along the following lines (but I have not yet got the exact wording)

    Your current level of funding does not constitute the appropriate level for a professor at Imperial College. Unless you submit and are awarded a Platform grant as PI in the next 12 months we will seek to initiate disciplinary action against you. This email constitutes a warning that your performance is being monitored and that action may be brought if you fail to meet the conditions herein

It didn’t take long to get hold of an email from Grimm that has been widely circulated within Imperial. The mail is dated a month after his death. It isn’t known whether it was pre-set by Grimm himself or whether it was sent by someone else. It’s even possible that it wasn’t written by Grimm himself, though if it is an accurate description of what happened, that’s not crucial.

No doubt any Imperial staff member would be in great danger if they were to publish the mail. So, as a public service, I shall do so.

The email from Stefan Grimm, below, was prefaced by an explanation written by the person who forwarded it (I don’t know who that was).
Dear Colleagues,

You may have already heard about the tragic death of Professor Stefan Grimm a former member of the Faculty of Medicine at Imperial College. He died suddenly and unexpectedly in early October. As yet there is no report about the cause of his death. Some two weeks later a delayed email from him was received by many of the senior staff of the medical school, and other researchers worldwide. It has been forwarded to me by one of my research collaborators. From my reading of it I believe that Stefan wanted it circulated as widely as possible and for that reason I am sending it to you. It is appended below.

This email represents just one side of an acrimonious dispute, but it may be indicative of more deep seated problems.

best wishes

Begin forwarded message:

From: Stefan Grimm <>

Date: 21 October 2014 23:41:03 BST

To: <big-email-list>

Subject: How Professors are treated at Imperial College

Dear all,

If anyone is interested how Professors are treated at Imperial College: Here is my story.

On May 30th ’13 my boss, Prof Martin Wilkins, came into my office together with his PA and ask me what grants I had. After I enumerated them I was told that this was not enough and that I had to leave the College within one year – “max” as he said. He made it clear that he was acting on behalf of Prof Gavin Screaton, the then head of the Department of Medicine, and told me that I would have a meeting with him soon to be sacked. Without any further comment he left my office. It was only then that I realized that he did not even have the courtesy to close the door of my office when he delivered this message. When I turned around the corner I saw a student who seems to have overheard the conversation looking at me in utter horror.

Prof Wilkins had nothing better to do than immediately inform my colleagues in the Section that he had just sacked me.

Why does a Professor have to be treated like that?

All my grant writing stopped afterwards, as I was waiting for the meeting to get sacked by Prof Screaton. This meeting, however, never took place.

In March ’14 I then received the ultimatum email below. 200,000 pounds research income every year is required. Very interesting. I was never informed about this before and cannot remember that this is part of my contract with the College. Especially interesting is the fact that the required 200,000.- pounds could potentially also be covered by smaller grants but in my case a programme grant was expected.

Our 135,000.- pounds from the University of Dammam? Doesn’t count. I have to say that it was a lovely situation to submit grant applications for your own survival with such a deadline. We all know what a lottery grant applications are.

There was talk that the Department had accepted to be in dept for some time and would compensate this through more teaching. So I thought that I would survive. But the email below indicates otherwise. I got this after the student for whom I “have plans” received the official admission to the College as a PhD student. He waited so long to work in our group and I will never be able to tell him that this should now not happen. What these guys don’t know is that they destroy lives. Well, they certainly destroyed mine.

The reality is that these career scientists up in the hierarchy of this organization only look at figures to judge their colleagues, be it impact factors or grant income. After all, how can you convince your Department head that you are working on something exciting if he not even attends the regular Departmental seminars? The aim is only to keep up the finances of their Departments for their own career advancement.

These formidable leaders are playing an interesting game: They hire scientists from other countries to submit the work that they did abroad under completely different conditions for the Research Assessment that is supposed to gauge the performance of British universities. Afterwards they leave them alone to either perform with grants or being kicked out. Even if your work is submitted to this Research Assessment and brings in money for the university, you are targeted if your grant income is deemed insufficient. Those submitted to the research assessment hence support those colleagues who are unproductive but have grants. Grant income is all that counts here, not scientific output.

We had four papers with original data this year so far, in Cell Death and Differentiation, Oncogene, Journal of Cell Science and, as I informed Prof Wilkins this week, one accepted with the EMBO Journal. I was also the editor of a book and wrote two reviews. Doesn’t count.

This leads to a interesting spin to the old saying “publish or perish”. Here it is “publish and perish”.

Did I regret coming to this place? I enormously enjoyed interacting with my science colleagues here, but like many of them, I fell into the trap of confusing the reputation of science here with the present reality. This is not a university anymore but a business with very few up in the hierarchy, like our formidable duo, profiteering and the rest of us are milked for money, be it professors for their grant income or students who pay 100.- pounds just to extend their write-up status.

If anyone believes that I feel what my excellent coworkers and I have accomplished here over the years is inferior to other work, is wrong. With our apoptosis genes and the concept of Anticancer Genes we have developed something that is probably much more exciting than most other projects, including those that are heavily supported by grants.

Was I perhaps too lazy? My boss smugly told me that I was actually the one professor on the whole campus who had submitted the highest number of grant applications. Well, they were probably simply not good enough.

I am by far not the only one who is targeted by those formidable guys. These colleagues only keep quiet out of shame about their situation. Which is wrong. As we all know hitting the sweet spot in bioscience is simply a matter of luck, both for grant applications and publications.

Why does a Professor have to be treated like that?

One of my colleagues here at the College whom I told my story looked at me, there was a silence, and then said: “Yes, they treat us like sh*t”.

Best regards,

Stefan Grimm


There is now a way for staff to register their opinions of their employers.The entries for Imperial College on suggest that bullying there is widespread (on contrast, the grumbles about UCL are mostly about lack of space).

Googling ‘imperial college employment tribunal’ shows a history of bullying that is not publicised. In fact victims are often forced to sign gagging clauses. In fairness, shows that the problems are not unique to Imperial. Over 3 years (it isn’t clear which years) , 810 university staff went to employment tribunals. And 5528 staff were gagged. Not a proud record

Imperial’s Department of Medicine web site says that one of its aims is to “build a strong and supportive academic community”. Imperial’s spokesman said “Stefan Grimm was a valued member of the Faculty of Medicine”.

The ability of large organisations to tell barefaced lies never ceases to amaze me.

I asked Martin Wilkins to comment on the email from Grimm. His response is the standard stuff that HR issues on such occasions. Not a word of apology, no admission of fault. It says “Imperial College London seeks to give every member of its community the opportunity to excel and to create a supportive environment in which their careers may flourish.”. Unless, that is, your research is insufficiently expensive, in which case we’ll throw you out on the street at 51. For completeness, you can download Wilkins’ mail.

If anyone has more correspondence which ought to be known, please send it to me. I don’t reveal sources (if you prefer, use my non-College email david.colquhoun72 (at)

Here are a few of the tweets that appeared soon after this post appeared.

Print Friendly
Share this:


December 1, 2014   2 Replies
« Previous
Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

    Pingback: “Wider lessons” | Music for Deckchairs
    robbo on December 3, 2014 at 09:29   

    Interesting £200,000 a year for a professor, that’s the same as the number that KCL came up with in the “summer of sackings”. Looks like a Russell Group get together at the top level?

Search this blog

    Log in
    Entries RSS
    Comments RSS

Download Lectures on Biostatistics (1971). Corrected and searchable version of Google books edition
Support all trials
AllTrials logo
Recently read
Latest Tweets

    RT @iamkarenwright: Eloquently written piece about the anguish of Stefan Grimm…

    37 minutes ago

    RT @DrMarkBurnley: @david_colquhoun Top-down bullying not unique to Imperial, but they are probably the most aggressive practitioners. UUK needs to address it.

    43 minutes ago

    @ShuhBillSkee @deevybee Clear that depts vary greatly at @imperialcollege But VC responsible for all

    47 minutes ago

    RT @xtaldave: @david_colquhoun - @imperialcollege's incoming tweets are (I would say) ~80% about Stefan Grimm. Their outgoing tweets? 0%

    About an hour ago

    RT @deevybee: .@david_colquhoun Not just @imperialcollege: also @KingsCollegeLon @QMUL @warwickuni & others who use grant income to decide who gets fired

    About an hour ago

    The tragedy of Stefan Grimm has struck a chord. Now 44,000 views in 36 hours

    About an hour ago

    @xtophercook @silParacchini sure. But biggest problem seems to be that 23andme hasn't provided info needed to estimate false pos & false neg

    About an hour ago

    Best ever RT @TEDTalks: "...the single biggest ethical problem facing medicine today." Why bad science is so harmful:

    Yesterday at 23:54

    Tragic story of Stefan Grimm has got my largest ever number of hits in 24 hours. Let's hope @imperialcollege listen

    Yesterday at 23:51

    @silParacchini @xtophercook the FDA allow all sorts of health scams, but even they have stopped it

    Yesterday at 23:47

    @sampendu @CognitiveDrinks @katejjeffery @hugospiers don't you think is relevant then?

    Yesterday at 23:26

    @silParacchini @xtophercook oh yes, the broadcast was OK, but pity it didn't really get round to false positive problem

    Yesterday at 23:25

    @Cilvrnum @Dorina335 @xtophercook I fear that you don't understand the maths, the genetics and not even the law

    Yesterday at 23:21

    @Cilvrnum @Dorina335 @xtophercook The ASA, FDA, MHRA disagree

    Yesterday at 23:18

    @sampendu @CognitiveDrinks @katejjeffery @hugospiers who is DNS?

    Yesterday at 23:17

Add to Technorati Favorites
Hits on this blog
StatCounter - Free Web Tracker and Counter
View Full Site
Proudly powered by WordPress
Pages: [1]