A Proposed Rule Would Politicize Medical Research. Scientists Are Not Happy

A Proposed Rule Would Politicize Medical Research. Scientists Are Not Happy. - The New York Times

SKIP ADVERTISEMENT

You have a preview view of this article while we are checking your access. When we have confirmed access, the full article content will load.

See more of our coverage in your search results.Encuentra más de nuestra cobertura en los resultados de búsqueda. Add The New York Times on GoogleAgrega The New York Times en Google

Scientists have called the proposal “catastrophic,” “devastating” and “stupid.” In late May, the Office of Management and Budget released a blueprint for reining in a vast amount of government funding in order to “advance the President’s policy priorities.” The proposed rule appears to expand political control of scientific and other grants, downgrade the role of peer review and effectively limit researchers’ ability to disseminate their findings and collaborate internationally, among other effects. There has been a groundswell of opposition among researchers, doctors and other biomedical professionals. Scientific journals have weighed in, professional societies called for action and patient advocacy groups spread guidance on how to comment before a July 13 deadline. Almost 100,000 comments have been submitted. A large majority of the 50,000 that were publicly posted appear to criticize the proposal, according to a New York Times analysis that used artificial intelligence to classify each comment’s position. (Comments on regulations can be submitted by anyone and don’t necessarily reflect broader public opinion.) A common objection, the analysis found, was to the perceived shifting of oversight power away from scientists and toward political appointees. One commenter who identified herself as a nurse and public health professional likened the proposal to “trusting your car mechanic to perform your open-heart surgery,” or asking your obstetrician to fix your car.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content. Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. Already a subscriber? Log in. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.

A Proposed Rule Would Politicize Medical Research. Scientists Are Not Happy

Related Articles

(no title)

Scientists reverse brain aging, with a nasal spray

AI has torched the market for junior programmers

Al Vigier: Canada's AI strategy shouldn't include secret Palantir bills

The Anatomy of an AI-Native Org