U.S. science must innovate or die, National Academy of Sciences president says
U.S. science must innovate or die, National Academy of Sciences president says The past year has been “filled with turmoil” for science, National Academy of Sciences president Marcia McNutt said during her State of the Science address By Jackie Flynn Mogensen edited by Claire C
U.S. science must innovate or die, National Academy of Sciences president says
The past year has been “filled with turmoil” for science, National Academy of Sciences president Marcia McNutt said during her State of the Science address
The past year has been “filled with turmoil” in science policy, National Academy of Sciences (NAS) president Marcia McNutt said on Tuesday during the annual State of the Science address in Washington, D.C.
McNutt cited problems such as “uncertainty” over federal support for science, “abrupt downsizing” of science agencies, a mass exodus of federal employees and the fact that the world’s top scientific minds are leaving the U.S.
“We always were the country where STEM talent came to us,” McNutt said, referring to science, technology, engineering and math fields. “Now we are exporting our science talent elsewhere.” After about 10 years as president of NAS, McNutt plans to step down on June 30.
If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing . By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.
Since President Donald Trump took office last year, U.S. science has been a target for funding cuts, firings and intense regulatory scrutiny . By one estimate, around 100,000 federal employees at scientific agencies have either been fired or left public office in his second term. The administration has also cut nearly 8,000 scientific grants, mostly from the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation, according to a Nature analysis published in January (some grants have since been reinstated by the courts).
And just last week, as Scientific American reported , the administration published a proposal to give political appointees final say on grant funding instead of researchers, overturning a decades-long precedent. “Now, what could possibly go wrong with that?” McNutt quipped on Tuesday.
