Skip to main content

The Year in Science Policy

How a new administration in the U.S. affected scientists around the world throughout 2017


KERRY GRENS


Science policy and other governmental actions that affect science, while barely getting a mention during the presidential debates of 2016, have been catapulted to the front page this year. On April 22, thousands of scientists and science supporters took to the streets for the first ever March for Science. For many, it was their introduction to advocacy, fueled by concerns over the newly inaugurated president’s attitude toward research—data on climate change, in particular.
Since then, a number of policy moves have affected the domestic and global scientific community. Here’s our roundup of 2017.

Travel and immigration

A number of government policies didn’t target research specifically, but affected scientists nonetheless. The federal travel ban blocking residents of several Muslim-majority countries from entering the U.S. left scientists uncertain about their career prospects and collaborations in the States.


For researchers from the affected countries who wouldn’t be able to fulfill work plans in the U.S., scientists across the globe opened up their labs. EMBO helped organize an online matchmaking list so stranded scientists could find colleagues in other countries with a spare bench.
A separate travel restriction implemented by the US government in July prohibited Americans from visiting North Korea, preventing a delegation of professors from Columbia University from forging scholarly relationships with counterparts in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.
A couple of months later, President Trump called for an end to the so-called Dreamers program, also known as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), which allows immigrants brought to the U.S. illegally as children to stay and work. The Scientist spoke with several Dreamers from the science community about the program’s end will affect them.

Meanwhile, Europe continues to deal with last year’s Brexit vote. Although the U.K. won’t leave the European Union until 2019, the move is already affecting the scientific community. Not only could British researchers lose EU funding, but collaborations appear to be suffering. Some welcome news arrived this month when the U.K. announced that Europeans living there can stay after Brexit, affecting thousands of immigrant scientists.


Science on a budget

ISTOCK, USCHOOLS
While federal investments in research tend to garner bipartisan support, President Trump’s budget proposal took deep swipes at science-funding agencies, including the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation. Congress bucked the President’s request for the most part, opting to develop budget proposals that boost research funding instead.

Controversial personnel

Scott Pruitt, EPA administratorFLICKR, GAGE SKIDMORE
President Donald Trump’s choices for the heads of various science-related federal agencies have met no shortage of criticism. In addition to the scandals whipped up by Sam Clovis, a former nominee for a key US Department of Agriculture scientist position, and former Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price, the prevalence of administration appointees who don’t buy the evidence for human-caused climate change has been seen as an affront to the scientific enterprise.


Scott Pruitt, who leads the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Energy Secretary Rick Perry, NASA administrator–nominee James Bridenstine, and others are not convinced humans are driving climate change. (In line with a disregard for the evidence in favor of human-induced climate change, Trump disbanded a climate change advisory committee at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in August.)
Elsewhere, a number of science leadership positions remain vacant, and the president has yet to hire a science advisor. Earlier in the year, The Scientist spoke with two scientists whose names had been floated as possible advisors, David Gelernter and William Happer, but still no one has been tapped for the job.

Science censorship

ISTOCK, DANGRYTSKU
Late last year after Trump had been elected, librarians, scientists, and computer programmers set out on a mission to archive government data, fearing that environmental programs—and their related data—might go unattended with the new administration. Their concerns were not unfounded, as climate change–related pages of government websites began disappearing in 2017.
Other moves by the EPA this year have carried a whiff of science censorship. Over the summer, Pruitt put a political appointee in charge of reviewing grants. In the fall, the agency prevented several of its scientists from speaking at a conference.

Out of Paris, into France

WIKIMEDIA, US EMBASSY FRANCE
France has seized upon the US government’s about-face on climate change from the last administration. Shortly after President Trump announced this spring that he would pull the U.S. from the Paris climate agreement, French President Emmanuel Macron launched the “Make Our Planet Great Again” initiative to poach researchers from abroad. More than 1,000 US researchers applied, and among the first 18 recipients announced this month, 13 are based in the states.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Secret Science 02:The 30 Most Disturbing Human Experiments in History

Disturbing human experiments aren’t something the average person thinks too much about. Rather, the progress achieved in the last 150 years of human history is an accomplishment we’re reminded of almost daily. Achievements made in fields like biomedicine and psychology mean that we no longer need to worry about things like deadly diseases or masturbation as a form of insanity. For better or worse, we have developed more effective ways to gather information, treat skin abnormalities, and even kill each other. But what we are not constantly reminded of are the human lives that have been damaged or lost in the name of this progress. The following is a list of the 30 most disturbing human experiments in history. 30. The Tearoom Sex Study Sociologist Laud Humphreys often wondered about the men who commit impersonal sexual acts with one another in public restrooms. He wondered why “tearoom sex” — fellatio in public restrooms — led to the majority of homosexual arrests in ...
1 comment
Read more

The Strange and Stranger Case of Wyndham Lathem

A Northwestern University plague researcher has been charged with a brutal murder. Here’s what we know about him. WIKIMEDIA,  TONY WEBSTER O n July 27,  The  Chicago Tribune   reported that there was an arrest warrant issued for  Wyndham Lathem , a microbiologist at Northwestern University. The crime Lathem would later be charged with was brutal—26-year-old Trenton James Cornell-Duranleau, whose body was found in Lathem’s apartment, had been stabbed dozens of times. But Lathem was nowhere to be found. As events unfolded over the following days, it became clear he had fled from Chicago to California with a second suspect, 56-year-old Andrew Warren, a University of Oxford employee from the United Kingdom visiting the states. Along the way, the two men apparently made an anonymous $1,000 donation in Cornell-Duranleau’s name to the Lake Geneva Public Library and another donation for $5,610 to a Chicago health center. Lathem had also sent a video to fa...
Post a Comment
Read more

Popular painkiller doesn’t have more heart risks than others, study claims

NEW ORLEANS — A long-awaited study on painkillers called nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, the most widely prescribed class of drugs in the world, has concluded that the three most commonly used carry a similar risk of cardiovascular complications. Yet critics say the study was too flawed to fairly compare them. Concerns about a type of NSAID called COX-2 inhibitors peaked in 2004 when the drug Vioxx was withdrawn from the market — a decision steeped in scandal because manufacturer Merck & Co had initially hidden data that would reveal the drug’s cardiovascular risks. A second COX-2 inhibitor, Pfizer Inc.’s Celebrex, was allowed to remain on the market with the condition that Pfizer conduct a study to prove that Celebrex was no worse than two older NSAIDs, naproxen and ibuprofen. The study lasted 10 years and enrolled more than 24,000 patients, but faced challenges. Doctors in European Union countries would not participate because they were worried a...
1 comment
Read more