Comment from Anonymous
Anonymous AnonymousOpposeIndividual
Summary: The commenter opposes the proposed OMB rule, arguing that the specific sections would isolate scientists and hinder the collaborative nature of scientific progress. They contend that these regulations would make it impossible for American scientists to share techniques and build upon each other's work.
Comment opposing proposed OMB rule OMB-2026-0034 [§200.454,§200.461,§200.432,§200.220]
The set of rules above, all four taken together, would mean that scientists would be required to work practically in isolation, and keep their results buried. The essence of science is building on the work that one has done, and that others have done; the combination leads to new insights and techniques. A technique developed by one group can be applied to an important system, say a class of proteins, that the developer of the technique would never have thought about, and very possibly would lack the kind of lab that could work with proteins. The only way to accomplish an important step forward would be for the developer of the technique to publish it in a journal, which requires publication fees, or at a conference (usually, and at a conference), very often in the journal of an appropriate scientific society or a conference organized by such a society. By isolating scientists, progress is halted. These sections would make it impossible for American scientists to function.