They were reacting to the news that US President Joe Biden had issued an executive order on February 28 to restrict access to sensitive American “bulk data”.

The sweeping order covers the sharing of genomic, biometric, personal health, geolocation, financial and government-related data and other personal information that could be used by certain countries to threaten American national security.

Apart from China, senior US officials identified Russia, North Korea, Iran, Cuba and Venezuela as countries likely to be targeted.

Biden’s order is not yet in force, as the actual regulations will be drafted and issued only after multiple rounds of public consultation.

The move also raised questions about the impact on Hong Kong’s plans to become a regional biomedical hub, with the government investing billions in the innovation sector to diversify the economy.

Professor Lo Yuk-lam, president of Hong Kong Bio-Med Innotech Association, told the Post that a possible outcome was that the city’s scientists would no longer be able to obtain genomic data of Caucasian Americans needed for comprehensive research.

But he added that the finalised details were needed to gauge the actual impact on Hong Kong.

Law Professor Stuart Hargreaves from the Chinese University of Hong Kong noted that Biden’s executive order only targeted transfers of “bulk data” and said much would depend on the quantity and kind Hong Kong researchers wanted, and how the US defined the “bulk” threshold.

“If researchers in Hong Kong do not require ‘bulk’ amounts of sensitive data to perform their research projects, they will not be affected by the proposed law,” he said. “Small-scale transfers of data will not be affected by the proposed law.”

He did not think the US action was triggered mainly by the US presidential election in November, when Biden, seeking re-election, will face former president Donald Trump.

In ‘unprecedented action’, US to probe Chinese tech in cars over security risks

“This is not just a matter of electoral politics, but part of a larger recognition in recent years of the importance that control and analysis of massive amounts of personal information can have on national security,” Hargreaves said.

In September 2022, Beijing introduced a security assessment measure for cross-border transfers of data. It required organisations to report to mainland Chinese authorities their security assessments in various situations, including the outbound transfer of sensitive personal data involving more than 10,000 people.

With the new law, foreign access to some databases of academic papers operated by the mainland has been suspended since April last year.

Lau Siu-kai, a consultant from the semi-official Chinese Association of Hong Kong and Macau Studies think tank, believed that data export would be an increasingly sensitive topic.

“Data is power,” he said. “The more data a country possesses, the stronger its national power.”

The Post spoke to six scientists in the local medical and biotechnology sectors, including top players in the field. Most expressed varying levels of concern about the US move, but asked not to be named as it was a sensitive issue and they needed to protect their work.

A major concern was over access to major genomic databases managed by the US, such as GenBank, a genetic sequence database under the government’s National Institute of Health.

Beijing slams US politicians over ‘botched’ stance on Hong Kong’s Article 23 law

GenBank provides an important source of genomic information of human, animals, virus and bacteria to researchers globally.

“It would be problematic if we don’t have access to it,” said a scientist focusing on diagnostic development.

Like other researchers the Post spoke to, he was worried that US allies, which also had sophisticated collections of genomic and health data, would follow suit and adopt similar measures.

“Research collaborations will be in big trouble if all those databases can’t be accessed,” he said.

The US database, along with one in Japan and another in Europe, formed the International Nucleotide Sequence Database Collaboration, a joint effort of storing and disseminating information of DNA and RNA sequences.

The US restriction could also affect Hong Kong scientists when it comes to having their research published in major scientific journals, as most required authors to upload their sequence data to one of the three databases.

Another researcher specialising in laboratory science said the US move could mean that in future, researchers doing large-scale multinational studies might be restricted to data of people from specific countries.

He questioned how the ban could be imposed effectively, as health or human genomic data was available to the public also through supplementary data in journal articles.

“If mainland China or Hong Kong could access such information, does that journal need to face any liability? This could bring a big impact to academic research,” he said.

During a forum on the Hong Kong budget earlier this month, Financial Secretary Paul Chan Mo-po was asked whether the US action could be a major setback to the city’s plans for innovation and technology development.

He said Hong Kong could still attract foreign research companies interested in the mainland market with its population of 1.3 billion.

He conceded that the restrictions could make it more difficult for Hong Kong scientists to work with some research institutions, but said the city could be innovative in finding solutions.

Can ByteDance have its TikTok cake and eat it too?

Chinese University told the Post it was aware of the executive order and its potential impact on academic research.

“We are working closely with our US partners to ensure compliance and continued progress in research, much of which addresses topics of global concern and promises to bring benefit to the global community,” the university said.

The Post had also reached out to the University of Hong Kong and the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, but received no reply.

Professor Lo suggested that Hong Kong scientists could collaborate with countries which appeared friendlier to Beijing.

“Could we approach countries such as Russia or Kazakhstan, which are friendlier to China, to get data of White people?” he said. “It’s not really the end of the world.”

He also described Hong Kong’s current exchange of data with scientists in Europe, in countries such as France and Germany, as “comfortable”.

A Hong Kong professor specialising in medical big data research said he was not surprised by the US move, as British officials had told him it would become more difficult to transfer data to Hong Kong in the current geopolitical situation.

But he believed that academic collaboration could still continue by working around the rules. For example, an international study could be done with American researchers analysing data their Hong Kong collaborators could not access.

The professor, who has been working with researchers in South Korea and Taiwan, also saw the possibility of expanding data sources through collaborations with the mainland and Macau.

“It is an infinite war. If one source is blocked, I would try another,” he said. “Hong Kong is a very versatile and resilient city. Universities in Hong Kong are able to develop new ideas.”