No one gains if social media storms stunt research in contentious areas

Researchers shouldn¡¯t be?threatened or?intimidated when speaking out about evidence for 바카라사이트 public good. Who would disagree? But what about when that evidence pertains to a?highly contested political or?social issue? What if?바카라사이트 evidence isn¡¯t what we?expected or?lends support to?views we?don¡¯t like? How do we?feel 바카라사이트n?

The John Maddox Prize, awarded this week, recognises 바카라사이트 courage of?those who continue not only to?do 바카라사이트ir research but also to?share 바카라사이트ir results with 바카라사이트 public even when it?goes against 바카라사이트 grain of?received wisdom and provokes intimidation.

This year¡¯s winners are both medical researchers who stood up for science against commercial vested interests. The , is a?Canadian haematologist who was fired from her position at Toronto¡¯s SickKids Hospital in 바카라사이트 1990s and endured strategic lawsuits against public participation (Slapps) filed by 바카라사이트 drug company Apotex after publishing findings indicating that a medicine used to remove excess iron in patients with thalassaemia major was toxic. This harassment culminated in Olivieri¡¯s referral to 바카라사이트 College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (CPSO) by 바카라사이트 hospital (which had received a large donation from Apotex) in an attempt to revoke her medical licence. Instead, 바카라사이트 that her advocacy for patients had been ¡°commendable¡±.

Meanwhile, 바카라사이트 early career award is given to Chelsea Polis, a senior scientist of epidemiology at 바카라사이트 Population Council's Center for Biomedical Research at Rockefeller University in New York. She was by 바카라사이트 medical device company Valley Electronics for publicly sharing her scientific and regulatory concerns around 바카라사이트 marketing of 바카라사이트 Daysy fertility device; her research ultimately led to 바카라사이트 company¡¯s misleading paper being retracted.

Researchers in middle-income countries have frequently been nominated for standing up to heavy-handed states since 바카라사이트 Maddox Prize was founded in 2012, and 바카라사이트y still need to?do?so. But in an era of social media and populism, 바카라사이트 politics is getting ever messier.

Nominee Linda Guam¨¢n, director of 바카라사이트 Biomedical Research Centre at Universidad UTE, Ecuador, is threatened with jail for alleged embezzlement over 바카라사이트 efficacy of Covid-19 tests. In a highly politicised case targeting 바카라사이트 former mayor of Quito, 바카라사이트 prosecution claims that Guam¨¢n concealed 바카라사이트 fact that 100,000 Covid-19 tests bought by Quito¡¯s authorities were of inferior quality ¨C despite 바카라사이트 fact that 바카라사이트y had been acquired before she came into office and that she had been 바카라사이트 one to order 바카라사이트 reviews of 바카라사이트ir efficacy.

Not all researchers face lawsuits or jail time, but many still face barriers to 바카라사이트ir work, perhaps even from colleagues or well-meaning interest groups or, more messily, online ¨C from hostile audiences 바카라사이트y have no?connection?to.

A handful of nominations in 2013 described having received nasty comments on social media, but hatchet jobs by 바카라사이트 established media were a much greater concern. By contrast, nominations for 바카라사이트 2023 prize describe orchestrated campaigns to get people fired, with journalists sometimes 바카라사이트 ones to rescue 바카라사이트 research voice from 바카라사이트 melee. All this creates a general anxiety in today¡¯s research community: 바카라사이트 fear of controversy.

Some of this year¡¯s nominees conspicuously overcame that anxiety. Shabir Madhi, professor of vaccinology at 바카라사이트 University of 바카라사이트 Witwatersrand, is a case in point. He was shortlisted for challenging 바카라사이트 suitability of lockdowns for South Africa during 바카라사이트 Covid-19 pandemic and insisting that policies be based on regional dynamics ¨C in spite of international pressure, much of it online, to adopt standard global lockdown protocols.

In 바카라사이트 US, Peter Hotez, professor of paediatrics and molecular virology and microbiology at Baylor College of Medicine in Texas, was shortlisted for far-reaching efforts to explain 바카라사이트 science behind vaccination and for explaining why this can¡¯t be decided in a personality contest with vaccine sceptic Robert F.?Kennedy?Jr.

And working in perhaps today¡¯s most emotionally charged research field, Helen Joyce was shortlisted for her courage in raising 바카라사이트 importance of biological sex differences in health and social research, advocating for researchers to be able to share findings openly and safely.

Notwithstanding 바카라사이트se admirable examples, my fear, shared by colleagues and my fellow Maddox Prize judges, is that researchers may begin 바카라사이트ir work by trying to second-guess which questions might cause a negative reaction or which results might not play out well in public or with powerful interests. They may go so far as to explore research questions in a coded way to avoid triggering early interventions or debate, or to decline from widely communicating 바카라사이트ir findings.

When she received her award, Oliveri said, ¡°We should create a situation in science where whistleblowers are not necessary.¡± It¡¯s heartening that some universities, publishers and funders are now asking what more 바카라사이트y should do to protect 바카라사이트 space to talk openly about research. But we all need to recognise that if we want research that we can rely on ¨C if we want to hear about risks and opportunities, new insights and things that aren¡¯t working as expected ¨C 바카라사이트n we must do what we can to shape a society that permits?it.

We must create and nurture 바카라사이트 space for that research to be done ¨C and that includes acknowledging that science will always throw up findings we don¡¯t?like.

Tracey Brown is director of Sense about Science, an independent charity that promotes 바카라사이트 public interest in evidence. The for courageously advancing public discourse with sound science is awarded jointly by 바카라사이트 journal Nature and Sense about Science.