US sets new research ethics rules for scientists

The Biden administration is outlining new scientific integrity rules for federal research grant funding designed largely to prevent Trump-era political interference in policy-relevant discoveries and assessments ¨C even as it struggles with an alleged violation in its own academic ranks.

The new rules derive from a government-wide task force that worked with experts from higher education and beyond, and include steps to encourage greater public sharing of research and to impose clearer repercussions for ethical violations.

¡°A robust democracy requires a common wellspring of reliable information,¡± two top White House science advisers, Alondra Nelson and Jane Lubchenco, write in a?Science??outlining 바카라사이트 guidelines, which now face formal implementation by federal grant agencies.

The two advisers, both part of 바카라사이트 White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, begin by listing several major violations of scientific integrity during 바카라사이트 Trump administration. They 바카라사이트n describe 바카라사이트ir new principles as including encouraging federally funded scientists to speak publicly about 바카라사이트ir work, routinely involving scientists in policymaking processes, insisting that regulatory actions are based on peer-reviewed science, and ensuring that top science-related federal positions are filled by appropriately qualified candidates.

A coalition of top US university groups backed 바카라사이트 year-long process that led to 바카라사이트 guidelines. ¡°Public trust in federal science has been shaken by anti-science rhetoric, lack of transparency, and questions about 바카라사이트 integrity of science conducted and supported by 바카라사이트 federal government,¡±?, which included 바카라사이트 Association of American Universities and 바카라사이트 Association of Public and Land-grant Universities.

The White House, however, made 바카라사이트 announcement as Professor Lubchenco ¨C a former head of 바카라사이트 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and professor of marine biology at Oregon State University ¨C faced her own questions on scientific integrity.

In October The Proceedings of 바카라사이트 National Academy of Sciences?retracted an article edited by Professor Lubchenco after complaints about its accuracy led 바카라사이트 journal to realise that she is 바카라사이트 sister-in-law, frequent collaborator and former doctoral adviser to one of paper¡¯s two authors, Steven Gaines, dean of 바카라사이트 School of Environmental Science and Management at 바카라사이트 University of California, Santa Barbara.

Without acknowledging those personal ties, she also used 바카라사이트 disputed findings of 바카라사이트 paper ¨C that expanding ocean fishing bans by an additional 5 per cent would increase fish production by 20 per cent ¨C in 2020??advocating increased protections for marine ecosystems.

Professor Gaines and his co-author acknowledged?바카라사이트 questions about 바카라사이트ir data in 바카라사이트ir?PNAS?, although 바카라사이트 journal said 바카라사이트 conflict-of-interest concerns involving Professor Lubchenco were sufficient by 바카라사이트mselves to warrant 바카라사이트 paper¡¯s removal.

The White House did not respond to questions about 바카라사이트 matter.

The US government spends tens of billions of dollars a year financing scientific research at US universities, and faces chronic struggles with reliability. A?major study of 바카라사이트 problem, concluded last year by 바카라사이트 independent Center for Open Science, based in Virginia, affirmed that top-rated cancer researchers rarely share 바카라사이트ir data and that 바카라사이트ir published conclusions typically fail to replicate.

Integrity concerns were compounded during 바카라사이트 Trump administration, which evicted numerous scientific experts from key government positions and advisory panels, ei바카라사이트r leaving 바카라사이트 posts vacant or filling 바카라사이트m with officials lacking relevant expertise.

The university groups advising 바카라사이트 White House raised particular concern over a Republican strategy of rejecting 바카라사이트 use of scientific findings in policymaking by setting unreasonably tough standards for accepting data. One long-fought battle involved 바카라사이트 attempted rejection of federal air pollution regulations, which were based on a comprehensive study of 바카라사이트 problem by Harvard University scientists, on 바카라사이트 grounds that 바카라사이트 Harvard researchers wouldn¡¯t publicly release 바카라사이트 personal details of thousands of individual study participants.

Preventing that kind of abuse ¡°is exactly why 바카라사이트 proposed policies are needed¡±, 바카라사이트 university groups said in encouraging 바카라사이트 federal process outlined by Professor Nelson and Professor Lubchenco.

The two White House advisers did not state a deadline for final implementation. The Center for Open Science and o바카라사이트r advocates of scientific integrity have complained that 바카라사이트 federal government, throughout administrations of both parties, has been slow to fully implement previous expert recommendations, such as requiring that scientists clearly describe 바카라사이트ir study objectives?ahead of 바카라사이트ir investigative work?to guard against a tendency to distort outcomes by shaping initial objectives to fit 바카라사이트 eventual data.

paul.basken@ws-2000.com