Mind Matters Natural and Artificial Intelligence News and Analysis
close-up-shot-of-microscope-with-metal-lens-at-laboratory-st-190532267-stockpack-adobe_stock
Close-up shot of microscope with metal lens at laboratory.
Image Credit: kkolosov - Adobe Stock

75% of Scientists in Nature Survey Thinking About Leaving U.S.

But there is less to this "trend" than meets the eye, when we look more closely at the survey
Share
Facebook
Twitter/X
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

This article is reprinted from National Review with the permission of the author.

hand of scientist holding flask with lab glassware in chemical laboratory background, science laboratory research and development conceptImage Credit: totojang1977 - Adobe Stock

I am rather amazed at the hysteria within the science sector because of DOGE investigations, proposed changes in status quo funding, and the canceling of some truly crackers scientific studies, such as researching transgender hormone injections in animals. But there is definitely some wailing and gnashing of teeth. A Nature survey found that 75 percent of the journal’s readers answering the online survey are “considering leaving the country.” From the Nature story:

The massive changes in US research brought about by the new administration of President Donald Trump are causing many scientists in the country to rethink their lives and careers. More than 1,200 scientists who responded to a Nature poll — three-quarters of the total respondents — are considering leaving the United States following the disruptions prompted by Trump. Europe and Canada were among the top choices for relocation.

The trend was particularly pronounced among early-career researchers. Of the 690 postgraduate researchers who responded, 548 were considering leaving; 255 of 340 PhD students said the same.

Methinks there is less here than meets the eye. First, considering the number of scientists in the country, that’s a paltry number of respondents. Second, it was self-selected and probably reflects respondents who are more ideological or have been personally impacted by the changes in approach. Yup:

But many of the 1,200-plus individuals who said they are planning to leave highlighted the challenges they see ahead. “I am faculty and want to stay as long as I can [to] support my lab and students, but if the NIH is dramatically cut we may not have a choice to stay in the US,” one person wrote. Another respondent is actively applying only to positions in Europe: “I am transgender, and the 1–2 punch makes it improbable that the life I want to live is a viable option in this country.” (The Trump administration is attacking transgender rights through a variety of policies.)

Meanwhile, former NIH Director Francis Collins is “concerned” about the current administration’s policies. From the Bethesda magazine story:

“This [administration] has involved quite a number of really quite dramatic actions that are degrading the ability of NIH to perform the mission that I think the taxpayers expect us to do, in terms of making discoveries about how life works and how disease happens and what to do about it,” Collins said. “We’ve been incredibly successful at that over these many decades — deaths from heart disease and deaths from cancer are dropping significantly. Sickle cell disease is being cured.”

Collins said he is concerned the NIH layoffs will encourage young, highly educated scientists to move to countries that are prioritizing health science research.

“All of those folks are really deeply alarmed about whether that career path is there for them, ” Collins said. “We were always the place where everybody wanted to come to pursue their scientific dreams. Now the idea that that might flip around the other way is almost inconceivable.”

Physician, heal thyself. Whatever problems now exist for the public medical research funding sector, the disappointing Collins helped create them with his shameful performance during Covid — including attempts to stifle scientific debate.

The United States needs a thriving health research science sector. Given the failures of the last several years, some changes in approach were definitely needed. I am fully confident that the new NIH director, Jay Bhattacharya (who is my friend), will be more than up to the job. Indeed, he is bubbling with ideas for reform and innovation and has already directed the agency to take steps to end censorship in science. Go Jay!


Wesley J. Smith

Chair and Senior Fellow, Center on Human Exceptionalism
Wesley J. Smith is Chair and Senior Fellow at the Discovery Institute’s Center on Human Exceptionalism. Wesley is a contributor to National Review and is the author of 14 books, in recent years focusing on human dignity, liberty, and equality. Wesley has been recognized as one of America’s premier public intellectuals on bioethics by National Journal and has been honored by the Human Life Foundation as a “Great Defender of Life” for his work against suicide and euthanasia. Wesley’s most recent book is Culture of Death: The Age of “Do Harm” Medicine, a warning about the dangers to patients of the modern bioethics movement.

75% of Scientists in Nature Survey Thinking About Leaving U.S.