Humanize From Discovery Institute's Center on Human Exceptionalism
Topic

Jay Bhattacharya

blurred-motion-of-scientists-in-a-laboratory-stockpack-adobe-801081926-stockpack-adobe_stock
Blurred motion of scientists in a laboratory
Image Credit: Jaroslav Machacek - Adobe Stock

75 Percent of Scientists in “Nature” Survey Thinking About Leaving U.S.

I am rather amazed at the hysteria within the science sector because of DOGE investigations, proposed changes in status quo funding, and the canceling of some truly crackers scientific studies, such as researching transgender hormone injections in animals. But there is definitely some wailing and gnashing of teeth. A Nature survey found that 75 percent of the journal’s readers answering the online survey are “considering leaving the country.” From the Nature story:

The massive changes in US research brought about by the new administration of President Donald Trump are causing many scientists in the country to rethink their lives and careers. More than 1,200 scientists who responded to a Nature poll — three-quarters of the total respondents — are considering leaving the United States following the disruptions prompted by Trump. Europe and Canada were among the top choices for relocation.

The trend was particularly pronounced among early-career researchers. Of the 690 postgraduate researchers who responded, 548 were considering leaving; 255 of 340 PhD students said the same.

Read More ›
Stand_Up_For_Science_in_Seattle_2025
Image by LivingBetterThroughChemistry at Wikimedia Commons: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/75/Stand_Up_For_Science_in_Seattle_2025.jpg

Stand Up for (Ideological) Science 2025 Day!

Yesterday was “Stand Up for Science 2025” day, which featured rallies around the country to “defend science as a public good and pillar of social, political, and economic progress.” But that isn’t what it was really all about. From the “Stand Up for Science” website’s listed policy goals: 1. End Censorship and Political Interference in Science Science thrives on open inquiry and evidence-based decision-making. We demand: An end to government censorship: Prohibit all forms of political censorship in scientific research, including restrictions on the topics of scientific research that are eligible for federal funding… A commitment to freedom of scientific expression: Protect scientists’ rights to communicate their findings freely, without fear of retaliation or suppression. Well, that’s ironically rich. Former NIH head Francis Collins spoke (and sang) at Read More ›

students-raising-hands-with-teacher-in-lecture-hall-stockpack-adobe-stock
Students raising hands with teacher in lecture hall
Image Credit: vectorfusionart - Adobe Stock

Universities Should Promote Rigorous Discourse, Not Stifle It

The New England Journal of Medicine recently published an advocacy article that attacks academic freedom and urges stifling contentious campus debates. Specifically, Evan Mullen, Eric J. Topol, and Abraham Verghese urge universities to "speak out publicly" and issue official institutional opinions about public controversies involving its professors "when it concludes that a faculty member's opinion could cause public harm." Read More ›
WHITE HOUSE VISIT TO THE NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH
Public domain image (NIH)

How Collins and Fauci Shattered Our Trust in Public Health

The Covid pandemic was devastating, not only for society generally, but also to the reputations of our once-trusted health agencies. Two of America's once-leading public-health officials bear great responsibility for this debacle — former National Institutes of Health (NIH) director Francis Collins and Anthony Fauci, who led the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases between 1984 and 2022. Read More ›