The first ten days of Donald Trump’s presidency have been just as extreme as many had feared including those of us in the scientific community, but the early reactions of scientists to fight Trump’s agenda have been encouraging.
We’ve collectively been sparked to “get out of the lab” and do something about it.
There are many things one can do as a scientist to oppose Trump’s extremism. I wrote a poston December 2 about how scientists can try to deal with the new Trump reality. That post rings true today almost 2 months later.
Perhaps inspired in part by the massively successful Women’s March on Washington the day after Trump’s inauguration (and the many satellite protests across America and the world) that dwarfed the inauguration turnout much to his chagrin, a movement of scientists was born to hold the Scientists’ March on Washington. You can read more hereand show your interest in participating (in DC or locally) here on their Facebook book. I’m hoping to participate either in DC or locally here in Sacramento at the state capitol.
Scientists including many Nobel laureates have signed a petition (you can sign it here) in the thousands against Trump’s toxic immigration ban. I sent in an email to sign it last night. It is encouraging to see federal judges ruling against Trump on at least aspects of this executive order.
UC Berkeley geneticist Michael Eisen has taken things a big step further than most by announcing he is running for the US Senate. You can follow him in his campaign incarnation hereon Twitter. It appearsother scientists are going to run for office as well.
Overall, scientists are getting out of the box of the lab and becoming more politically active in many ways in response to Trump. I see us scientists, whose lives revolve around data and facts, as having a key role in the larger movement countering the “alternative facts” fake reality pushed by the Trump administration.
What are the latest developments in stem cells and regenerative medicine in this first week of 2017 and right before the end of the past year? Here are some of the headlines and papers that have popped up that seem notable or surprising. Be sure to also check out our stem cell & regenerative medicine meeting hub for 2017.
Each year I make a list of predictions for the stem cell and regenerative medicine field for the coming new year. Later in this post I list my top 20 stem cell predictions for 2017. In looking at my past predictions I realized this will now be my 7th year doing stem cell/regenerative medicine yearly predictions.
You can see below links to these predictions for past years, which sometimes seems rather far removed from today and in other cases strike me as strangely apropos of our times.
Our President-elect recently released his health care policy agenda and it looks like the FDA is a target in terms of reducing oversight. Over at the Washington Post, Carolyn Johnson has a nice articleon this development.
One point in the agenda in particular has caught people’s attention as potentially the key indicator of what is to come for regulatory oversight of biomedical products:
“Reform the Food and Drug Administration, to put greater focus on the need of patients for new and innovative medical products”
This one sentence says a great deal in terms of signaling that Trump wants dramatically less oversight or at least that’s how “reform” is being interpreted.
For those of us in the stem cell field this sentence from Trump sounds very reminiscent of language from proponents of reduced regulation and even stem cell clinics, who say they are just in it for the patients but keep keeping racking up profits.
This signal from Trump does not bode well for stem cell and regenerative medicine oversight in the coming years, but we’ll have to stay tuned to see how this develops.