09.2018 | THE SCIENTIST 13FROM THE EDITORScience journalists are essential to advancing the quality of the research enterprise.BY BOB GRANTNo Enemy
I
n this special issue focused on the leading edge of scien-
tific research into all things muscle, one key fact stuck
out as I read through the interesting stories it contains.
As researchers Gillian Butler-Browne, Vincent Mouly,
Anne Bigot, and Capucine Trollet write in “The Elderly
Muscle” on pg. 48, “ To you readers over age 30, we’ve got
some bad news for you. Chances are good you’ve already
begun losing muscle.”
This is a reality that my 40+-year-old body registered
long before I read that passage. Nonetheless, seeing it
spelled out in front of my face drove home the depressing
point all the way to the depths of my withering sarcomeres.
Butler-Browne and her coauthors do give us a ray of hope,
detailing exercise’s ability to halt or reverse this trend, even
in people older than 70.
This gradual wearing down of physiology brings to
mind another alarming and erosive trend happening in our
world. The President of the United States has lately been
stepping up his already disturbing attacks on the media,
often repeating the phrase: “The press is the enemy of the
American people.” As his rhetoric has become more fre-
quent and vitriolic in the past few months, a consortium
of more than 300 US newspapers, from Maine to Hawaii,
recently banded together to simultaneously run editorials
combating the idea that media outlets seek to harm the
populace or spread untruths about the unassailable char-
acter of a misunderstood leader.
I won’t spend too much ink here contravening these
patently ridiculous assertions. My colleagues at The Boston
Globe, the Honolulu Star-Advertiser, Anchorage Daily News,
and other outlets have done a sufficient job in this regard.
I can, however, share insights from the perspective of
a science journalist. In our business, we’re no strangers
to the post-publication butting of heads that sometimes
breaks out among researchers, politicians, industrialists,
and members of the public. After all, one person’s well-
supported scientific fact can be another’s political or busi-
ness headache. Exposing the empirical dangers of widely
sold chemicals, highlighting the damage wrought by cli-
mate change, tamping down the hype of wonder drugs’
marketing, or correcting mistaken public perceptions
about vaccines is all in a day’s work for a science journalist.
And just like those who make a living reporting on poli-
tics, science journalists must often relate unflattering facts
about the people and institutions they cover. For decades,
The Scientist has been one of the clearest voices calling outinstances of misconduct, waste, shoddy research, and hype
in the scientific community. Far from being an antagonist,
much less an enemy, of science or researchers, science jour-
nalists reporting, writing, and editing such stories seek to
propel the pursuit of knowledge by holding those at the
helm accountable and keeping them honest. Transparency
and accountability make the scientific enterprise stronger,
and by extension create a safer, more informed citizenry
protected by sound policy. As journalists covering science,
it is our duty to shine a light on discoveries and help inform
the public, but also to bring scientific fact to bear on busi-
ness or political issues, and to expose the darker corners of
the scientific enterprise so that the many can learn from
the mistakes of the fe w.
These precepts of responsible journalism, like aging
muscle, can atrophy if not exercised. And this withering
can be accelerated when people in power actively seek to
undermine our efforts.
As you peruse this issue, which includes a plethora of
interesting muscle facts and one or two well-founded mus-
cle opinions, know that we at The Scientist pledge to con-
tinue to fulfill our journalistic duty with strength and clar-
i ty, as we have for more than three decades. gEditor-in-Chief
ANDRZEJ KRAUZE [email protected]