In times of crisis, true colors are revealed. This sentiment holds especially true in the realm of science, where the Trump administration’s assault on research funding has exposed the hypocrisy of many scientific societies. These organizations, tasked with advocating for their members and the communities they serve, have largely remained silent in the face of devastating cuts to projects focused on equity, health disparities, and marginalized populations.
The American Public Health Association stands out as a beacon of resistance, joining forces with the ACLU in a lawsuit to protect essential research projects. However, the majority of scientific societies have failed to take a stand, despite the outcry from individual scientists. This passivity was starkly evident at the recent Society of Behavioral Medicine conference, where grassroots researchers petitioned their leadership to stand up against politically motivated grant cancellations.
The petition quickly garnered over 400 signatures, with researchers expressing deep concern over the erosion of academic freedom and scientific integrity. Terminated projects aimed at advancing health equity for LGBTQ+ individuals, BIPOC communities, women, immigrants, and rural populations were highlighted as crucial efforts to improve lives and address unmet needs. The decision of the SBM board not to join the lawsuit was met with disappointment and frustration, leaving many to question the commitment of scientific organizations to defend science in the face of adversity.
As the threats to research funding continue to grow, it is imperative for scientists to demand transparency and accountability from their professional societies. Organizations like the American Psychological Association and the National Academy of Sciences, with their vast memberships, have a powerful voice that should be used to defend science and the communities it serves. The silence of these institutions in the current climate of political interference raises serious concerns about their priorities and values.
The time for caution is over; professional societies must be bold in their defense of science. Projects across various fields, from HIV research to global food safety regulation, are at risk of being targeted next. Scientists must ask themselves what their professional societies are actively doing to protect science and reconsider their memberships if the answer is “nothing.” Silence is not neutrality—it is complicity. Science deserves better, and it is up to us to ensure that our institutions uphold the values of integrity, equity, and progress in the face of adversity.
