What science should learn from the Epstein files

The latest release of files relating to Jeffrey Epstein includes yet more examples of how entwined the financier and child sex offender was with the scientific establishment. No doubt the scientists who feature in the newly released documents, including several chemists, will come under scrutiny now—though having your name in the files is hardly conclusive evidence of any guilt. Researchers can’t be blamed for writing to Epstein, at least before his 2008 conviction. But Epstein continued to donate money and cultivate networks of power and influence up to his 2019 arrest and death.Let’s be clear: Epstein’s crimes were reprehensible. His influence on the world of science was also corrosive. But the case lays bare the realities of power and patronage that have been true for centuries. The bracing reality of the need for funding means that many will take the money where they can, particularly if the money comes with few conditions. Also while very few philanthropists are Epstein, there are always trade-offs.It is impossible for a researcher requesting funding to be held responsible for the actions of a benefactor. Nonetheless, if we are judged by the company we keep, the same may be true of the money that we receive.In their defense, many researchers would argue that the biases or proclivities of their funders do not influence their work, but that can be a hard claim to prove. Cultivating personal relationships can be a sensible tactic, especially with individual philanthropists. And a researcher’ s capacity to conduct thorough due