Following Donald Trump’s recent re-election, Sci&Tech Writer Lauren Dicken considers the concerns expressed by America’s scientific community

Third year Biochemistry student
Published
Images by Darren Halstead

In the wake of Donald Trump’s re-election, America faces critical questions about the future of science: from public health to climate change. During Trump’s first term (2017-2021), trust in scientific research suffered a significant blow, and his return raises the question of whether this trend will continue. With controversial appointments and bold opinions dominating his early decisions as president, concerns are mounting. Health policy has already sparked significant debate, particularly with his appointment of vaccine sceptic Robert F. Kennedy Jr (nephew of President John F. Kennedy) as Secretary of Health. RFK’s plan to ‘Make America Healthy Again’ echoes the rhetoric of Trump’s ‘Make America Great Again’; but what does it really mean?

RFK has a long history of promoting scientific misinformation, making his appointment very divisive. Last year, in an interview with Fox News, he stated that ‘autism comes from vaccines’ despite studies indicating that there is no link. At an October rally, Trump announced he would let RFK ‘go wild’ on healthcare, a vague statement about the future of his administration that has concerned many in the public health community.

[RKF] stated that ‘autism comes from vaccines’

The American Public Health Association (APHA) strongly opposes RFK’s nomination. Its executive director Georges Benjamin offered a scathing perspective: ‘He is not competent by training, management skills, temperament or trust to have this job. He’s just absolutely the wrong guy for it’. RFK claims that Trump ‘asked [him] to end the chronic disease epidemic in this country’ but his focus on rhetoric rather than science and lack of public health expertise raise alarms. Chronic disease, such as diabetes and heart disease, is an area where RFK’s qualifications are widely viewed as inadequate. This area requires treatment rooted in science and data, and critics are concerned his approach will be too ideological and leave science behind.

Clean energy and environmental policy are another area of science under scrutiny for Trump’s administration. Despite Republican-led states benefiting the most from clean energy investments, Trump has vowed to repeal the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), America’s largest ever clean energy investment. Texas leads in renewable energy capacity, while states such as Iowa, Kansas, and South Dakota generate more than half of their power from wind and solar. A Washington Post analysis found that districts Trump won in the 2020 election actually received three times more clean energy investment than those won by Biden. Furthermore, in these areas, the IRA created 110,000 jobs and $126 billion in private investment. 

Trump’s scepticism toward renewable energy is well-documented. He dismisses climate change as a ‘hoax’, labels climate scientists as ‘alarmists’ and has made unsubstantiated claims against wind and solar technologies. He has also repeatedly aligned with fossil fuel interests – they donated over $75 million to Trump’s 2024 campaign. The appointment of Lee Zeldin (previous Representative of New York) as the administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) signals a further retreat from environmental progress. Zeldin has promised to undo the environmental protections which were reinstated under Biden’s presidency, echoing Trump’s reversal of over a hundred environmental regulations in his first term. 

Zeldin has promised to undo the environmental protections which were reinstated under Biden’s presidency

The stakes are high for America’s future. A study published in Energy Policy indicates decarbonising the US economy could create 9 million jobs by 2050, while renewable energy remains cheaper than fossil fuels. Yet Trump’s policies threaten to stall recent progress, deepen reliance on fossil fuels, and weaken climate action. America is the world’s biggest carbon fuel producer, and second biggest source of carbon emissions, so a reversal of climate action from its leader could have devastating implications. 

Whether these two appointments will deliver meaningful change remains uncertain. As health and energy challenges mount, Trump’s administration risks prioritising ideology over science, and lacking a clear vision supported by scientists and the public health community. These decisions will have far-reaching consequences for America’s people, economy and environment that will outlive Trump’s presidency.


Enjoyed this article? Read more from Sci&Tech here:

Positive Environmental News from 2024

Beyond The Sea: Decoding Dolphin ‘Smiles’

Your Brain On…Exercise

Comments