SCIENCE science.org 11 FEBRUARY 2022 • VOL 375 ISSUE 6581 591EDITORIAL
E
ric Lander’s resignation as President Biden’s sci-
ence adviser and director of the Office of Science
Technology and Policy (OSTP), amid allegations
that he bullied and demeaned subordinates, is the
latest disappointment from an administration that
has been struggling to guide the nation with sound
science and science leadership. Lander’s departure
now leaves empty the first ever OSTP directorship to be
added to the President’s Cabinet. This vacancy joins the
absence of permanent directors for the Food and Drug Ad-
ministration (FDA) and the National Institutes of Health
(NIH), not to mention a secretary of Health and Human
Services (HHS) so disengaged as to appear absent. Let’s
hope the president appoints the best people—in brilliance
and character—into these positions, stops undermining
his own workplace policy of respect and dignity, and gets
the country back on course to follow
the science, as he pledged.
Biden’s victory celebration, with
signs boasting “The People Have
Chosen Science,” brought hope to the
scientific community. After 4 years of
attacks on science by former President
Trump and his accomplices, Biden’s
early days were encouraging. Out-
standing appointments were made to
Biden’s science team, including Alon-
dra Nelson, Jane Lubchenco, Frances
Arnold, and Maria Zuber. The new
director of the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention (CDC), Ro-
chelle Walensky, was an accomplished
physician-scientist who argued for
strict adherence to pandemic mitigation measures. But
disappointment has built steadily over the past year, be-
ginning with various nominees. There was a long delay
in Lander’s confirmation for the very reasons that have
now brought on the current scandal. There was a pro-
tracted search for an FDA commissioner, a vital position
during the pandemic. Even after Robert Califf was finally
announced as the nominee, he has yet to be confirmed
by the full Senate. And months after Francis Collins an-
nounced his retirement as NIH director, there is no sign
of his replacement.
When it comes to the pandemic, the administration
has not been able to get out of its own way. Rapid re-
versals of messaging on masks and boosters from the
CDC have been commonplace, with the agency’s director
contradicting statements she made before she joined the
administration. In two consecutive weeks, Anthony Fauci,
the chief medical adviser, made predictions that didn’thappen: first on an airline vaccine mandate that didn’t
materialize and then on a test requirement for ending
quarantine. It’s been natural to wonder who’s in charge.
In his Science editorial, Eric Topol laid blame on ineffec-
tive leadership by Xavier Becerra, the HHS Secretary, who
should be coordinating the nation’s pandemic response.
And now, the latest mess. What is troubling about
Lander’s resignation is that it came under pressure and
2 months after the White House completed the investi-
gation. Firing Lander was clearly not the White House’s
original intent, contradicting the president’s promise to
enforce a zero tolerance policy when it comes to treating
colleagues disrespectfully. Lander’s bullying of OSTP co-
workers was initially reported by Politico, which obtained
a recording of an OSTP staff briefing by White House
administrators who conducted the investigation. White
House Press Secretary Jen Psaki con-
firmed the findings in a press briefing,
where she faced understandably tough
questions about the administration’s
approach to appropriate conduct. All
Lander was required to do was apolo-
gize and hold “brown bags” with staff.
Yet this was Biden’s inaugural pledge:
“If you are ever working with me and I
hear you treat another colleague with
disrespect, talk down to someone, I
promise you I will fire you on the spot.
On the spot. No ifs, ands or buts.”
Maybe the White House decided
to set aside that promise for Lander
because he was about to take charge
of Biden’s recently announced Cancer
Moonshot initiative and testify before Congress about
the Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health
(ARPA-H), which seeks to redesign the nation’s biomedi-
cal ecosystem. But Lander should be a lesson for the
White House. Legitimate questions about his personal
conduct were raised before and during his confirmation
hearing. Enthusiasm for his brilliance and political acu-
men was tempered by accusations that he did not ap-
propriately acknowledge the contributions of Nobel Prize
winners Jennifer Doudna and Emmanuelle Charpentier
to gene-editing technology. He apologized and then was
appointed.
Biden has much work to do to maintain the confidence
of the scientific community. It must begin with assem-
bling strong science leadership, and that now includes
replacing Lander immediately at the cabinet level. No ifs,
ands, or buts.
–H. Holden ThorpThe lessons of Lander
H. Holden Thorp
Editor-in-Chief,
Science journals.
[email protected];
@hholdenthorpPublished online 8 February 2022; 10.1126/science.abo
PHOTO: CAMERON DAVIDSON
“Biden has
much work to do
to maintain
the confidence
of the scientific
community.”