A storm is tearing through one of Australia’s most respected brain research institutes – and it’s not just about science.
NeuRA, a leading neuroscience research centre, has been thrown into turmoil after a dramatic suspension of one of its co-founders, Professor Simon Gandevia. His removal came just days after he emailed colleagues, directing them to an anonymous website containing unverified allegations of research misconduct against NeuRA’s CEO, Professor Matthew Kiernan, AM.
Here’s the twist: Gandevia wasn’t the source of these claims, and the allegations themselves remain unproven. Yet, the fallout has been swift and severe.
Gandevia, a world-renowned spinal cord injury researcher, was already set to leave NeuRA at the end of the year. Back in August, the institute’s leadership announced that two major research groups – including his own – would be cut following a strategic review. Around 30 scientists were told their final day would be December 31. The official reason? NeuRA’s new five-year plan is shifting focus away from spinal cord injury research toward broader brain health and function.
A NeuRA spokesperson explained that the board had decided to discontinue the spinal cord injury programs led by Gandevia and Professor Jane Butler, citing funding realities and strategic priorities. They publicly thanked both professors and their teams for decades of work improving the lives of people with spinal cord injuries.
But the decision has left the affected researchers scrambling. Their labs house specialised equipment – including a dedicated spinal cord injury gym – and they are mid-way through several human clinical trials. Now, they’re racing to relocate these projects to other institutions before the year ends.
Then came Monday’s email. Gandevia pointed colleagues to the anonymous site hosting the misconduct allegations. By Wednesday morning, he was suspended, told to leave the premises, and placed under investigation. Neither he, Kiernan, nor NeuRA’s spokesperson would comment on the specifics of the suspension.
NeuRA’s official statement acknowledged the existence of defamatory claims made online in recent weeks against multiple academic papers, but stressed that the institute has established processes for handling misconduct allegations.
Gandevia’s history with NeuRA runs deep – he co-founded the institute in 1991, built its Spinal Cord Injury Research Centre, and currently holds $2.9 million in taxpayer-funded grants running until 2026. Inside NeuRA, many researchers are stunned by the decision to cut his group, describing them as global leaders whose departure could harm the institute’s future.
Morale, insiders say, has been sinking since the new strategic plan was unveiled earlier this year. Several staff members, speaking anonymously, described a climate of fear: people “walking on eggshells,” unsure who might be next to lose their job. One senior researcher bluntly said, “People are scared shitless.”
Gandevia has engaged prominent employment lawyer Chris McArdle, who confirmed he is representing multiple NeuRA employees. McArdle noted that many researchers have been told their roles will end this year, and while no one wants the matter to escalate to court, tensions remain high.
And here’s where it gets controversial: Was Gandevia’s suspension truly about the email, or was it part of a broader push to silence dissent during a major organisational shake-up? Could NeuRA’s strategic pivot be masking deeper internal conflicts?
What do you think – is this a case of necessary restructuring, or a dangerous purge of respected scientists? Drop your thoughts below; this one’s bound to divide opinion.
