Every Story Is a Science Story

Scientific American has been accused of straying from classical science content and of wading into areas where we don't belong.

When we publish stories about social justice or human rights, it's usually on the research supporting health care for trans people or abortion. An opinion piece against forcing trans girls to play on boys' sports teams was replied to by a user who wrote, "You should probably move everything back to science, facts and stat and leave the 'wokness'." It doesn't make sense for your credibility.

Advancing DEI and Social Justice is not something any truth seeking institution or organization should prioritize.

Scientific inquiry is a pure, clean, completely objective enterprise, and that what we publish should be devoid of politics or the perspectives of people who are affected by the culture of scientific research. It's true that science is relevant to policy and politics.

Every lane is our lane as a publication committed to explaining the world.

Science has solved problems using data-driven reasoning and analysis. The researchers who analyzed our strings of genetic code showed there were no significant differences between humans. The narrative around the meaning of race was changed because of this.

The long-term effects of abortion were shown in the landmark Turnaway study. People who have the procedure suffer from emotional and physical damage, according to antiabortion activists. The researchers did not find the same thing. The scientists found that the women who weren't able to access abortion services had many negative effects. Women who were able to get an abortion had more physical and mental health problems than women who did not. This medical procedure, politicized by people who think that women should not be in control of their bodies, is safe and effective.

The popular perception of Viking culture is that it is male-first, might- always. According to Michle Hayeur Smith, an anthropologist at Brown University, Viking women were romanticized by white supremacists and incels because of their control over the production of textiles.

It is part of our mission to share the evidence relevant to important social issues that science illuminates controversial topics.

The editors of Scientific American endorsed Joe Biden. A magazine with the name "Scientific" should not be biased, according to a user. We've weighed in on divisive political issues in the past. An article written by a physicist critical of the development of the hydrogen bomb was to be published by the magazine. The 3,000 copies of the issue that contained the article were burned when the Atomic Energy Commission became aware of the manuscript. We published technical criticisms of the Star Wars missile defense system more than 30 years ago.

Voters, policy makers and political leaders can use science to make better decisions. Politics and science are involved in governing. Billions of dollars in medical research and technological innovation are determined by the executive and legislative branches. According to the political action committee 314 Action Fund, a record number of candidates with a science, technology, engineering and math background are running for political office. They aim to apply their expertise in scientific thinking to policy making.

It's a tactic to silence people with relevant expertise from weighing in on divisive issues. The criticism tries to keep the power of wealthy, white, male members of society. When we report on science that is relevant to the health and well-being of disempowered groups, we are often criticized for rejecting the fact that there is science behind social issues. Scientific American will continue to cover the science relevant to social justice and the most important questions facing society.