Obama's science plan
One of Barack Obama’s science advisors addressed the annual gathering of science writers this Sunday in Palo Alto, CA. John McCain’s campaign declined to send anyone, which meant that the entire time slot could be taken by Sharon Long, a Stanford professor and member of the National Academy of Sciences, who advises Obama in her personal capacity.
She didn’t mention stem cells during her 45-minute talk, but instead described “returning integrity to scientific advising in the White House”, a veiled reference to widespread complaints that Bush has filled advisory positions with people who agree with him rather than top scientific minds. (See an earlier post, Surgeon General Censored ).
During the question period, I asked whether she was concerned about the leadership role of the U.S. National Institutes of Health in stem cell research. States have grown their own regulatory and funding infrastructures to promote stem cell funding, and while researchers tell me they are very grateful for the money, they also tell me that these state-by-state systems are inherently inefficient and create bureaucracy blockades to collaborations. When I asked Long whether this was a problem, she said that Barack Obama would allow the NIH to fund human embryonic stem cell research.
I chased her down afterward to get her to answer the question I’d asked, and she seemed familiar with the issue, acknowledged it as a problem, but said it was “too granular” to be considered at this time. (For more on this issue, see a Patchwork quilt of funding and State initiatives strain stem-cell scientists )
Overall, I thought the priorities she described reflected the issues I hear scientists talk about. Often, these speeches induce yawns, full of vague platitudes of how very important science is, time-worn hang-wringing, etc. There was some of that, of course, but there was also a plan to double science funding over ten years, plus the acknowledgement that turning funding taps on and off discourage young people to enter the field.
There also seemed to be considerable thought of how a president should get scientific advice. Obama has pledged to follow recommendations produced from the National Academies of Sciences, which lists 60 positions that they feel could benefit from high levels of expertise. Obama’s science and technology advisor would report to the President (that role got kicked out of the White House under the Bush administration). By creating a hybrid position, a President Obama could have that person working before all the Congressional approvals went through. (For our columnist thinks scientists might be a bit too obsessed on this issue.)
Here’s a link to Obama’s science plan as well as takes on individual issues . John McCain outlines his ideas on technology, climate change, agricultural policies, energy and other science-related issues as separate topics.
Comments
I was alarmed at the Obama campaigns choice of Sharon Long as a science advisor. Although I like her work with plants and reciprocal relationships, I am disgusted that she was on the board of directors for Monsanto.
Monsanto is diabolical. They create sterile seeds and sue organic farmers when the gmo product takes hold tainting otherwise organic and productive crops. But far worse is their darling Roundup. I was a gardener. I had a pesticide license, My boss was a previous employee of Monsanto. They say that its as safe as coffee, but people die from pesticide exposure. The concentrations of the unlabeled "inert" ingredients that make up 90% of the product are known carcinogens and do adversely affect the reproductive cycles of animals including humans. Think dangerous levels of sterility.
Basically Monsanto creates sterile seeds and sterile human beings. I beg Obama not to bankroll Monsanto's dystopian philosophy.
Its scary that Obama would even think of befriending such a hideously unregulated and favored player of the Bush administration.
Posted by: krissy | November 6, 2008 07:07 AM