Sandro Galea

Science provides insights that we can use to inform our actions, but there are many other considerations that should factor into decisions made by societies, as well. 

The costs of excluding science and scientists seem to outweigh the potential benefits.

With respect for the evidence that randomized clinical trials afford, their value is inflated in many ways. And their authority is always worth questioning.

Would science be the same without the central role played by peer review?

Conversations about the production of science cannot be held without also considering the choices of funders.

From CRISPR to AI, new technologies progress quickly. The regulation of science needs to be taken seriously from the very start.

The diversity of audiences that we face in science push us to consider and reconsider how we present our work.

As scientists, our authority is always fleeting. And this is how it should be.

The problems of diversity in science run deeper than identity. We also need diversity of perspectives.

When science operates as a team.