Former UCSF doctor claims university defamed him in 2022 report on unethical prison experiments

SAN FRANCISCO (CN) — A longtime San Francisco dermatologist and professor at the University of California, San Francisco, is fighting back against accusations he conducted unethical prison research experiments in the 1960s and 1970s, claiming the university “knowingly and maliciously” lied about his role in the studies to protect itself from reputational harm.

In a lawsuit filed in San Francisco Superior Court, Dr. Howard Maibach, now in his late 90s, says UCSF used Maibach as a “sacrificial scapegoat” for experiments UCSF faculty had conducted at the California Medical Facility, a state prison medical facility in Vacaville, California, in the 1960s and 1970s, and the investigation and eventual report on Maibach was “deliberately skewed to present a preconceived false narrative” about the doctor.

“The report conspicuously insulates UCSF from any real responsibility for the CMF research, while mercilessly ‘throwing [Dr. Maibach] to the wolves’ (according to the chair of USCF’s dermatology department) with false, malicious and highly defamatory allegations that he had purportedly engaged in serious misconduct, and unethical and racist research practices at CMF some 50-60 years ago,” Maibach said in the complaint, filed Tuesday.

The report, released on Dec.12, 2022, by UCSF’s Program for Historical Reconciliation, found there was not much evidence that Maibach received approval from a UCSF committee for his research, nor did records show there were protocols informing participants of informed consent or research risks.

The report also said Maibach “practiced questionable research methods,” citing experimental methods, including “topical application and intravenous dosing of pesticides and herbicides,” mosquito studies that placed mosquito cages close to or directly onto the skin of participants and “experimenting with medications to determine their therapeutic effectiveness.”

“Based on our archival research of internal human subject research review board(s) records and state of California hearings proceedings, PHR has concluded that Maibach and others engaged in questionable informed consent practices at the prison, especially before 1969,” the report states.

In a letter to the UCSF dermatology department on Dec. 15, 2022, Dr. Jack Resneck Jr., chair of the UCSF Department of Dermatology, said that “much of the research described clearly contradicts our community’s ethical values … Even if this research may have been accepted by some in its time, it is essential that we now acknowledge the harms that were done and the inconsistency with our UCSF values.”

A few days later, on Dec. 20, 2022, Maibach said in a press release about the report that “I regret having participated in research that did not comply with contemporary standards” and “the work I did with colleagues at CMF was considered by many to be appropriate by the standards of the day, although in retrospect those standards were clearly evolving.”

However, in the complaint filed Tuesday, Maibach disputed the accusations against him, stating UCSF faculty were already conducting research at CMF when he joined the university in 1961 and that most of the incarcerated individuals at CMF were white and had not claimed they suffered from his work.

Maibach additionally argued his studies at CMF were “carefully planned to avoid any harm to the participants,” and the defendants had public records that “confirm the CMF research was low risk .” He further said all of his superiors at UCSF and relevant government agencies knew about the federally funded studies he conducted at CMF and that records show “UCSF approval was … not needed ” for such studies.

Maibach contends the rumors that he conducted unethical research at CMF only arose after the University of Pennsylvania denounced Dr. Albert Kligman, a former professor of dermatology at the university, in 2021 for reported unethical experiments on Black inmates beginning in the 1950s.

Maibach claims his previous association with Kligman fueled “guilt-by-association rumors” against him and other UCSF faculty members, which caused UCSF’s then-Executive Vice Chancellor and Provost Daniel Lowenstein to ask him to admit to and apologize for his supposed unethical conduct.

“To appease those demands and without any investigation or due diligence into the Kligman-based rumors whatsoever … defendant Lowenstein approached Dr. Maibach and asked him to make a reputation-crushing and career-ending public admission and apology for unspecified wrongdoing that he did not commit with respect to the CMF research,” he said in the complaint.

“When Dr. Maibach rightfully refused, defendant Lowenstein immediately conceptualized and formed the PHR as a specific ‘mechanism’ to deal with the situation.”

Maibach says evidence he received after a judge ordered the UC Board of Regents to turn over public records relating to the PHR and its investigation shows Lowenstein “directed” the PHR to “focus” on Maibach, intending for the group and its findings to “provide an ‘excuse’ for UCSF to publicly condemn’ and denounce Dr. Maibach, and issue the institutional apology being demanded by UCSF’s community members with respect to that research.”

Maibach adds that if he admitted to the conduct, “defendant Lowenstein has confirmed under oath that the ‘entire matter would have been well-resolved’ and there would have been no need to form the PHR.”

Maibach names several defendants in the complaint alongside Lowenstein, including Resneck; Brian Dolan, PHR director and professor at UCSF; Aimee Medeiro, PHR director and an associate professor at UCSF; the Regents of the University of California; and 50 unnamed defendants.

He claims the defendants defamed through three publications, including the 2022 report, the letter from Resneck to UCSF dermatology and the press release announcing the report. He also asserts false light and civil conspiracy claims.

Maibach is asking the court to prohibit the defendants from publishing the claimed defamatory statements, as well as award damages.

A representative for UCSF said they do not comment on pending litigation.

Representatives for the UC Board of Regents or Maibach did not respond to a request for comment.

Follow @mhattridge_