Scientific institutions must react when science is under attack

Given the escalating attacks on science in the U.S., it is imperative that scientists take a stand to defend their discipline

Photo by Markus Spiske: https://www.pexels.com/photo/street-science-movement-generation-2981572/

Fiona Fox’s recent article in Research Professional News cautions that expelling Elon Musk from the Royal Society could undermine public trust in science. However, I believe that this perspective overlooks the critical role that scientific institutions play in upholding ethical standards and defending the integrity of science, especially at times when science and scientists are subject to threats and intimidation from political institutions. It is imperative that scientists and their representative bodies actively engage in political discourse to protect scientific integrity, particularly when it is under direct threat, as has been clearly evidenced by recent developments in the United States.

The Role of Scientific Institutions in Upholding Integrity

The Royal Society, as one of the world's most esteemed scientific institutions, bears the responsibility of maintaining the standards among its fellows. Elon Musk, admitted as a fellow in 2018 for his technological innovations, has recently engaged in behaviour that many argue contravenes the Society's code of conduct. Notably, over 2,000 scientists (including myself) have signed an open letter urging the Royal Society to expel Musk, citing his public frequent dissemination of unfounded conspiracy theories, his assault on the conduct of science in the United States and beyond as head of the Trump administrations Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) and his malicious accusations towards public scientists (like Anthony Faucci) and other public figures, which they believe undermine the Society's values and reputation.

In my view the argument that expelling Musk could harm public trust in science fails to consider the damage inflicted by retaining a fellow whose actions contradict the ethical principles the Royal Society purports to hold. Inaction on this front is tantamount to tacit approval and runs the risk of eroding public confidence in the Royal Society’s commitment to its own standards.

Science is political

Science does not operate in a vacuum; it is inherently intertwined with societal and political structures. When political actions threaten the foundational principles of scientific inquiry, it becomes essential for scientists and their institutions to engage. The recent developments in the United States serve as a stark illustration of this necessity.

Since the inauguration of President Donald Trump on January 20, 2025, a series of executive orders have precipitated significant disruption within the U.S. scientific community. These orders have led to huge funding cuts, the dismantling of diversity, equity, and inclusion programmes, and the suspension of critical research initiatives. Agencies such as the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the National Science Foundation (NSF) have been compelled to halt grant review meetings, disrupting multiple scientific research programmes.

Moreover, the administration has mandated the removal of climate change references from official websites and has imposed restrictions on scientists' ability to communicate their findings. These actions represent a direct assault on scientific freedom and integrity, fostering an environment where evidence-based policymaking is supplanted by political agendas.

Scientists should not sit on their hands

In light of these challenges, it is incumbent upon scientific institutions to take a definitive stance in defence of scientific integrity. The Royal Society's decision regarding Elon Musk's fellowship is emblematic of a broader imperative: the need for the scientific community to actively oppose actions that undermine the principles of science.

By expelling a member whose conduct is manifestly in opposition to the Society's values, the Royal Society would affirm its commitment to ethical standards and reinforce public trust in science. Such an action would signal clearly to the global community that the scientific establishment is resolute in upholding the integrity of its discipline, irrespective of political pressures.

Conversely, failure to act may embolden those who seek to exert political influence over science and scientists and erode its foundational principles. In an era where misinformation can proliferate rapidly, the silence or inaction of reputable scientific bodies may be misconstrued as complicity, further damaging public perception and trust.

The intersection of science and politics is unavoidable, and at a times when science is under siege, passive observance is not a viable option. By addressing the concerns surrounding Elon Musk's fellowship, The Royal Society has the opportunity to exemplify the proactive stance that scientific institutions must adopt to safeguard their values and the broader scientific enterprise. Engagement in political discourse, when it pertains to the defence of science, is not only appropriate but essential. It is through such principled actions that public trust in science is maintained and strengthened.