Philadelphia, PA (2/17/98)- When politicians clash with
scientists, it is the environment that suffers, says Dr. JoAnn Burkholder,
a North Carolina State University aquatic ecologist and recipient of
the Scientific Freedom and Responsibility Award at this year's meeting
of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.
Dr.
Burkholder has been widely recognized for her work on the toxic marine
microorganism, Pfiesteria piscicida. Burkholder's research has implicated
Pfiesteria's toxins in massive fish kills and mysterious human ailments
in Mid-Atlantic coastal waters, most recently in rivers emptying into the
lower Chesapeake Bay. Her research links Pfiesteria outbreaks to
increased nutrient loading from sewage, animal wastes and other sources.
"The scientific links are established. Yet in some of the areas
hardest hit by Pfiesteria, environmental managers refuse to recognize them,
even though they can cite no peer-reviewed data to support their stance,"
Burkholder says. "It's clearly a case of science being held hostage
by economic fears and political interests. Our rivers and estuaries are
in decline, and Nero is fiddling."
Graphic: SEM of the flagellated
zoospore stage of a dinoflagellate obtained at a magnification of 10,000x.
The political battle over Pfiesteria is just one example of a trend
occurring more and more frequently in environmental and public health arenas,
Burkholder says. "We saw it happen at the Kyoto Summit, and we see
it taking place in medical research too. A problem is identified;
scientists are asked by policy makers to present their best research on
it; but then the policy makers disregard the science if it isn't politically
expedient. And if the scientist persists in calling attention to his data,
he is labeled a crusader or activist and his credibility is attacked,"
she says. "What type of message is this sending to young scientists?
It's telling them: Play the political game, or pay the consequences."
Burkholder suggests that that scientific associations like AAAS should
hold workshops for scientists -- especially for young researchers and junior
faculty members whose studies have begun to cross political or economic
lines -- to better prepare them to handle poltical intransigence.
"Scientists are trained to conduct bioassays and take field samples,"
she says. "We're not trained in how to give congressional testimony,
access the political lay of the land, or respond to reporters' questions.
Yet increasingly, that's part of the job."
These workshops should be part of a broader program of symposia, support
systems and continuing-education programs that stress the importance of
ethics. "The temptation to make a Faustian bargain with political or economic
interests can be great, especially in the early years of a scientist's
career when research funding is desperately hard to come by," she says.
"We need to find ways to recognize and reward scientists for pursuing science
in the public good."
|
What's News Index
