On November 3, Vote to End Attacks on Science
Choosing Donald Trump for president is choosing fiction over fact—a fatal mistake
Instead of thinking about whether to vote Democratic or Republican in the upcoming U.S. election, think about voting to protect science instead of destroying it.
As president, Donald Trump’s abuse of science has been wanton and dangerous. It has also been well documented. Since the November 2016 election, Columbia Law School has maintained a Silencing Science Tracker that records the Trump Administration’s attempts to restrict or prohibit scientific research, to undermine science education or discussion, or to obstruct the publication or use of scientific information. By early October, the tracker had detailed more than 450 cases, including scientific bias and misrepresentation (123 instances), budget cuts (72), government censorship (145), interference with education (46), personnel changes (61), research hindrances (43) and suppression or distortion of information (19).
The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) also keeps a tracker of the administration’s attacks on science. It details antiscience rules, regulations and orders; censorship; politicization of grants and funding; restrictions on conference attendance; rollbacks of data collection or data accessibility; sidelining of science advisory committees; and studies that have been halted, edited or suppressed. The fact that so many types of abuse have occurred, and so often that they each warrant their own category, is scary.
Read more at https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/on-november-3-vote-to-end-attacks-on-science/
In a First, New England Journal of Medicine Joins Never-Trumpers
Editors at the world’s leading medical journal said the Trump administration “took a crisis and turned it into a tragedy.”
By Throughout its 208-year history, The New England Journal of Medicine has remained staunchly nonpartisan. The world’s most prestigious medical journal has never supported or condemned a political candidate.
In an editorial signed by 34 editors who are United States citizens (one editor is not) and published on Wednesday, the journal said the Trump administration had responded so poorly to the coronavirus pandemic that they “have taken a crisis and turned it into a tragedy.”
The journal did not explicitly endorse Joseph R. Biden Jr., the Democratic nominee, but that was the only possible inference, other scientists noted.
The editor in chief, Dr. Eric Rubin, said the scathing editorial was one of only four in the journal’s history that were signed by all of the editors. The N.E.J.M.’s editors join those of another influential publication, Scientific American, who last month endorsed Mr. Biden, the former vice president.
Read more atwww.nytimes.com
Over 900 economists, including Nobel Laureates, sign open letter urging Americans to vote against Donald Trump
The letter will be updated until November 3. As of October 28, the letter has 907 signatories including 2020 Nobel Prize winner Paul Milgrom, 2016 winner Oliver Hart and 2012 winner Alvin Roth, besides George Akerlof – Nobel Laureate and husband of former US Fed Chief Janet Yellen
By Jocelyn Fernandes
Oct 28, 2020
Over 900 economists, including Nobel Laureates, have signed an open letter urging Americans to oppose the re-election of US President Donald Trump. The letter will be updated until November 3.
As of October 28, the letter has 907 signatories, including 2020 Nobel Prize winner Paul Milgrom, 2016 winner Oliver Hart and 2012 winner Alvin Roth. Also on the signatory list is George Akerlof – Nobel Laureate and husband of former US Federal Reserve Chairman Janet Yellen.
On the economy, the signees ‘strongly urged’ voters not to re-elect Trump listing his “chaotic and ineffective approach to negotiation with trade partners,” which they claim has harmed American farmers and interrupted supply chains.
Read more at www.moneycontrol.com