Comment from Maya Rao
Maya RaoOpposeAcademic
Summary: A public health research staff member at a U.S. university opposes the proposed regulation, arguing that it increases administrative burdens and subjects scientific research to political discretion. The commenter expresses concern that the "Gold Standard Science" requirement and potential disqualifications based on affiliations will undermine scientific integrity and the U.S. position as a global leader in research.
As a public health research staff at a U.S.-based university and a former implementer of global health programs funded by U.S. government cooperative agreements, I am deeply concerned by this proposed regulation's impacts on global health research grants. Changing approval processes to increase administrative burden and subjecting scientific research activities to the discretion of political appointees is not a transparent process. This regulation risks fundamentally altering the traditional balance between scientific peer review, agency discretion, and institutional autonomy. I am concerned about research grants being conditioned on compliance with an undefined “Gold Standard Science” standard and institutions potentially being disqualified based on their affiliations or the political character of their prior work. This regulation will profoundly damage the US’ preeminent position as the world leader in scientific research and will undermine the international scientific partnerships and scientific integrity that are essential for pandemic preparedness, infectious disease control, workforce development, economic, and environmental sustainability in the US and globally.