Science is siege.
Friday evening, the White House published a decree called Restoration of the science of golden standards. At its nominal value, this order promises a commitment to research funded by the federal government “transparent, rigorous and impactful” and politics which is informed by “the most credible, reliable and impartial scientific evidence”. But hidden under scientific rhetoric is a plan that would destroy scientific independence in the United States by giving the names of politicians the latitude to reject whole research bodies and to punish researchers who do not reach the objectives of the current administration. In other words: it is the standard science of gold.
According to the ordinance, “the science of gold norms means science carried out in a way that is:
(i) reproducible;
(ii) transparent;
(iii) communication of error and uncertainty;
(iv) collaborative and interdisciplinary;
(V) skeptical about its results and hypotheses;
(vi) structured for the falsifiability of hypotheses;
(VII) subject to a review by impartial peers;
(VIII) Accept negative results as positive results; And
(IX) without conflicts of interest. »»
The order imitates the language of an active reform movement in science to increase the rigor and transparency of research – a movement commonly called the open scientific movement, to which some of us are contributors. Science is, by nature, continuous work in progress, constantly self-scrunt and always looking for opportunities to be improved. We must all be able to celebrate the investment of any administration in improving the opening, integrity and reproducibility of research.
But, with this decree, we cannot.
Instead of being on open science, he grants appointments aligned by the administration the power to designate any research as a scientific fault based on their own “judgment” and includes the power to punish the scientists involved accordingly; it would be Arm the government contrary to the public interest.
The consequences of state -dictated science can be catastrophic. When Trofim Lysenko, a researcher who denied the reality of genetic heritage and natural selection, won the favor with Joseph Staline and took control of agriculture in the Soviet Union, thousands of scientists who disagreed with him were dismissed, imprisoned or killed. His disastrous agricultural prescriptions finally led to famines that killed millions in the USSR and China.
Science does not take place by sequentially establishing unattainable conclusions, but rather by regularly accumulating many evidence, examining the weaknesses and pursuing additional evidence. Almost all studies, any source of evidence, any conclusion, does not respond to all aspects of the list of best practices in the White House. It has nothing to do with laziness, and even less a fault by individual scientists; It is simply a consequence of the fact that science is difficult. Scientists have constantly struggling with uncertainty and can nevertheless arrive at robust and valid conclusions, such as the fact that the vaccines do not cause autism, and that the fire of fossil combustibles warms the planet and wreak havoc on our climate.
Under the terms of the decree, the appointments faithful to the president can voluntarily find a justification for the label any Research research as scientific misconduct, then penalizes researchers involved accordingly. This administration has Already appropriate the language of open science to assert control and make heavy blows to the scientific ecosystem of the United States – including Cancel thousands of active research grants In climate science,, Disinformation and disinformation,, vaccines,, mental health,, Health of women,, LGBTQ health + And Stem education. Calls to “revisit” decades of work that establish the safety of vaccines beyond the shadow of a doubt “Because the only way you can get good science is replication ”and request for Vaccine clinical trial practices contrary to ethics And additional data, echo the adoption of the bad faith of the open scientific language.
Trump has also advanced a budget of the calling congress Massive cuts for federal expenses in research and development and taken Important repissariums Against universities that have not fallen online with its requests. He went to Propose a change of rule by the office of staff management This would install the political police at all levels of federal agencies, converting thousands of workers in presidential names which can be summarily dismissed without regular procedure for an arbitrary political reason. This new decree raises the concern that many of our best scientists would be targeted in Lysenkist purges. Meanwhile, the threat of such actions already has a scary effect on all scientists.
Science is the most important long -term investment for humanity. Interference in the scientific process by political referees stifles the freedom of expression and thought of scientists. Science depends on the speech without hindrances – a free and continuous discussion of data and ideas. We, like the rest of the scientific community, aspiring to reach a greater opening, integrity and reproducibility of research to accelerate discovery, treatment in advance and solutions favorable to society to meet the biggest challenges of society. Responding to this objective will not occur by centralizing power over science and scientists according to the whims of any political administration. We see this decree for what it is: an attempt to sell the future of the United States for Pyrite.
-
Colette Delawalla is a doctoral candidate at Emory University and Executive Director of Stand Up for Science. Victor Ambros is a winner of the Nobel Prize in 2024 in physiology or medicine at Chan Medical School, University of Massachusetts. Carl Bergstrom is a biology professor at the University of Washington. Carol Greider is a 2009 Nobel Prize winner in medicine and a distinguished professor at the University of California in Santa Cruz. Michael Mann is the presidential professor of the earth and the environmental sciences and the director of the Center for Science, the sustainability and the media of the University of Pennsylvania. Brian Nosek is executive director of the Center for Open Science and professor of psychology at the University of Virginia