I’m organizing my own thinking on how Trump’s election will impact science and stem cell/regenerative medicine research in particular and will post on that soon, but for now here are some of the early responses I’ve seen where scientists comment on this big, unexpected event and key questions. These are in addition to the almost infinite number of expressions of angst on Twitter.
- At Nature, “What scientists should focus on — and fear — under Trump”
- Jeremy Berg, Editor of Science, on Reunifying America after the election.
- Over at STAT, Trump in 30 seconds: science and medicine in flux.
- MIT Tech review has 6 big tech questions for President Trump.
- Advice from scientists for Trump published at Science.
Everything is personal to Trump, and he only recently learned that there was an NIH. I doubt if he knows what the FDA does, except in the most simplistic terms.
I think the fate of the FDA will entirely depend on who gets his attention, however brief it is. So it’s a toss-up.
Hi well I am not too sure myself, but if he is a business man and has good guys stating what drives the economy, then I would hope that he will invest even more into R&D, it may however be more translational! But with the right lobbying need to emphasise that basic research is the driver of translational research that leads to jobs and economic benefits…..Hopefully he is a follower of this mantra!
Translational vs. basic research was my first thought too – and I’m hoping this government shifts more of the federal basic research funding into translational research and especially commercial transfer where applications become widely available.
This mantra that basic research drives translational research is something only basic researchers believe to make them feel comfortable – but it’s not true. Surprise surprise! Translational researchers drive translational research.