- Lisa Green
Rumors have been flying about who President Obama will appoint to head the National Institute of Health (NIH). Since the beginning of the Obama administration, Francis Collins has been considered one of the frontrunners for the post, but in the last two weeks the rumor mill seems to think that Collins is as good as appointed.
On Saturday, the LA Times reported that “a source familiar with the selection process” said that Collins was in the final stages of screening. The general consensus of the scientific community is that Collins will pass the screening with flying colors.
Collins was the director of the National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI) for 15 years where he spearheaded the campaign to map the human genome. When he stepped down from that position a year ago the then-head of NIH, Elias Zerhouni, said “Francis has provided 15 years of outstanding leadership to NHGRI and has been a trailblazer in the scientific community at large. His contributions to the world of genomics and medicine have been enormous. He has been a tremendous colleague, friend, and brilliant visionary. I know that he will continue to make groundbreaking advances in biomedical research.”
In addition to an intimate understanding of both basic and clinical research, Collins also knows his way around Capitol Hill. When he led the human genome project, he created the ELSI program in order to research the ethical, legal and social implications of the human genome science. Collins’ concern about those issues led to him working closing with Congress on the Genetic Information Non-discrimination Act (GINA). Last summer the New England Journal of Medicine did a video interview with Collins as a supplemental to his paper Keeping pace with the times–the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008. Watching the interview you can see many characteristics that would make Francis Collins an excellent leader for the NIH.
[polldaddy poll=1659264]
SHARE
11 Comments
I think it would be awful. We’re just getting away from a conservatively Christian “guided” national science policy; this would be a huge step backwards. Scientists already feel bullied, whether or not this feeling would continue under Collins, there is the perception that nothing has changed. Will issues like stem cell research and women’s health be considered in a scientific or religious way? I want someone I can trust will be objective and not superstitious.
I would prefer to have someone in the position who doesn’t spend so much public, high-profile energy promoting his religion. More importantly to me, I really don’t trust a leader (let alone a scientific leader) who believes the “God” mythology. Belief in a god means that whole areas of science are off-limits based on arbitrary untestable notions.
You think he would be a terrible choice for NIH director because he believes in God? What kind of crazy discrimination is that? Aren’t a person’s religious beliefs private?
He left the NIH to write more books about god and to run his religious organization http://biologos.org/ He should just stick to that stuff.
Sharon : ” Will issues like stem cell research and women’s health be considered in a scientific or religious way?”
Yes. No question about it. In his book called The Language of God, Collins clearly and explicitly states that he is against the expansion of existing stem cell lines.
http://www.amazon.com/Language-God-Scientist-Presents-Evidence/dp/0743286391
Just what control does the director of the NIH have? Does the director have the power to dictate whether or not other researchers going to deny other researchers can work on stem cells? Does the director have the power to deny grants based on whether the PI is an atheist or a Christian?
I meant
Does the director have the power to dictate whether or not other researchers can work on stem cells?
He has done an excellent job promoting his opinion (and mine) that religion and science don’t have to contradict one another. He has helped Christians realize that just because you believe in a Creator doesn’t mean evolution didn’t, and isn’t, occurring, which would contradict scientific evidence. He is a very intelligent person and there’s no reason to believe he won’t run NIH in that fashion. Stop believing that Christianity is “poisoning” everything and be more open-minded.
You can’t do good science (or supervise good science) if you believe in God?? Strange position to take.
@Megan
This is from NIH.gov
“The Office of the Director is the central office at NIH. The OD is responsible for setting policy for NIH and for planning, managing, and coordinating the programs and activities of all the NIH components.”
“the NIH Director plays an active role in shaping the agency’s research agenda and outlook.”
Pingback: Opening Science « Nextbio’s Blog
You may be able to do good science if you believe in God, but you can do better science if you don’t.