this post was submitted on 30 Jun 2025
1197 points (99.4% liked)

Bluesky

1381 readers
1309 users here now

People skeeting stuff.

Bluesky Social is a microblogging social platform being developed in conjunction with the decentralized AT Protocol. Previously invite-only, the flagship Beta app went public in February 2024. All are welcome!

founded 7 months ago
MODERATORS
 

Alt Text:

In our recently submitted grants we had to change “traumatic brain injury” to “concussive brain injury” and “male and female mice” to “male and non-male mice” because traumatic and female are now verboten words that can get our grants killed. It’s insanity.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Kyle_The_G@lemmy.world 14 points 1 day ago (1 children)

thats fair. I guess there is no such thing as a perfect system, there will always be conflict of interest and bias. I get your point too, just because someone is an expert in their field doesn't mean their knowledge translates to leadership and good judgement on funding decisions ect.

[–] wabasso@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

I was thinking along your lines too, but have to concede the rebuttal as well. But I think we can still aim for the ideal of science proceeding as neutrally as possible once the funding is granted. Getting funding is the political interface. The question of “What should we do?” must be political, but “How should we do it?” can be left to science.

[–] Kyle_The_G@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago

Ya its healthy to have this discussion. I still think the policy-makers should have a background in what they are governing but that is what advisory boards and councils are for. I definitely commented with too broad of a generalization with "no politics in science", I should have said I dislike when politics oversteps in medicine/healthcare/research... I do see the value however as this comment chain grows.