Viewpoint: How did science become a messy jumble of politics?

Viewpoint: How did science become a messy jumble of politics and negotiation.
Credit: Pexels/ Markus Spiske

Should science be political? It is often imagined that debates around this sort of question turn on abstruse theoretical matters. What does it mean to be political? And is it even possible to avoid it?

Follow the latest news and policy debates on sustainable agriculture, biomedicine, and other ‘disruptive’ innovations. Subscribe to our newsletter.

In October 2020, the prestigious academic journal Nature endorsed Joe Biden’s presidential campaign. [Recently,] Nature Human Behaviour—a journal which, as far as I can tell, is only loosely related to Nature—published the results of an experiment purporting to show that this endorsement eroded trust in science in general and in Nature in particular. This included diminished trust in information provided in the journal about COVID-19.

If these results are accurate and generalizable, they can form the basis of a strong and simple argument against scientific journals adopting the practice of making political endorsements. First, these endorsements don’t serve their intended purpose—to convince anyone who’s undecided to support a particular candidate—so there’s no real benefit. Second, these endorsements threaten something else the journals value—public trust in science and in the journals themselves—so there is a real cost or risk.

This is an excerpt. Read the full article here

{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.singularReviewCountLabel }}
{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.pluralReviewCountLabel }}
{{ options.labels.newReviewButton }}
{{ userData.canReview.message }}

Related Articles

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Does glyphosate—the world's most heavily-used herbicide—pose serious harm to humans? Is it carcinogenic? Those issues are of both legal and ...

Most Popular

ChatGPT-Image-Jun-16-2026-10_29_11-AM
What’s behind Anthropic’s warning about the accelerating development of AI
Screenshot-2026-06-16-at-10.02.22-PM
Viewpoint: ‘Industrial food’ primer—Challenging the dangerous delusions of the alternative food movement
ChatGPT-Image-Jun-9-2026-01_11_37-PM
Turmeric supplements: More risks than benefits
ChatGPT-Image-Jun-16-2026-10_01_45-AM-2
Viewpoint—Recursive self-improvement: AI leader Anthropic calls for AI slowdown
Screenshot-2026-06-17-at-11.57.12-AM
Viewpoint: Raw milk and the myth of safety—ProPublica exposes the growing anti-homogenization movement
newborn infant baby mother
Facts & Fallacies Podcast: The truth about vitamin K shots
ChatGPT-Image-Jun-15-2026-02_31_28-PM-2
Trump-appointed cancer panel head backed by supplement and anti-vaccine companies promotes discredited support for ivermectin as a potential cure
ChatGPT-Image-Jun-4-2026-03_07_27-PM
AAP v. Kennedy: While a court challenge grinds on, RFK Jr. quietly advances his anti-vaccine conspiracy agenda
ChatGPT-Image-Mar-10-2026-01_39_01-PM
Viewpoint—“Miracle molecule” debunked: Why acemannan supplements don’t work
Screenshot-2026-06-16-at-11.23.32-AM
In a rebuke to RFK, Jr.’s anti-vax crusade, journal retracts study claiming hepatitis B vaccine–autism link
ChatGPT Image Jun 16, 2026, 12_03_37 PM
Kennedy accused of trying to ‘bully’ science journal that retracted study linking vaccines to infant deaths
Screenshot-2026-06-05-at-2.12.30-PM
Some plants can poison you. So how did humans figure out what is safe to eat?
Screenshot 2025-07-30 at 10.48
Can gene editing eliminate Down syndrome? Scientists have done it in lab-grown cells
glp menu logo outlined

Get news on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.