- FDA Rules for Cigarettes Are a Victory for Public Health, for Science (and for the Earth’s Climate?)
- Legislation Introduced to Codify Stem Cell Rules
- Commissioner Enhances FDA’s Commitment to Personalized Medicine
- Perfecting Policy on Stem Cells
- NIH and FDA Aim to Retool Regulatory Science
- DOE Leads Federal Funding for a Regional Innovation Cluster
- Certainty on the Science of Climate Change
- They’re Not Perfect Cells, But They’re Model Cells
- Genomic Medicine on the March
- President’s Budget Aims to Recharge Regional Innovation
- Event: The Science of Climate Change
- Progress in Bioethics
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
Science Debate: The Seeds of a Successful Conversation
The organizers of Science Debate 2008, including Science Progress Contributing Editor Chris Mooney, consider the impact of their campaign to convince the major party candidates to talk about science and technology in a national forum in the current issue of Science (.pdf here, more comment at The Intersection). Noting the large coalition of scientific organizations and prominent individuals, they observe:
We see this as strong evidence that the U.S. science community has been yearning for a stronger voice during an administration that has been repeatedly criticized by scientists (5).
Scientists themselves recognize that their work has been misrepresented, misinterpreted, or ignored for ideological purposes, but the writers also point out that the effort to elevate the connection between scientific and technological research and nearly every major national policy concern was an interdisciplinary effort:
Among the motivations we have heard for taking up this cause are the following: continuing inaccurate media coverage, poor science education, widespread public science illiteracy (6), flat funding and/or cutbacks to research funding and consequent contraction of opportunity, lack of credible public policy response to climate change and other environmental issues, and governmental suppression of science information. In a climate of declining support for science, the United States risks losing its competitive advantage to emerging science superpowers. Although science and engineering have been responsible for half of U.S. economic growth over the past half-century (3), by 2010, according to some estimates, 90% of all scientists and engineers will live in Asia (7).
A science and technology debate seems unlikely at this juncture, but one positive message from this initiative is that science is not an island apart from policymaking. Rather, smart policy depends on sound scientific advice in order to make people healthier, safer, and more prosperous—and if that’s the focus of the conversations going forward, then the organizers can count it as a success.
Comments on this article
