Most [American] scientists identify as Democrats (55%), while 32% identify as independents and just 6% say they are Republicans. When the leanings of independents are considered, fully 81% identify as Democrats or lean to the Democratic Party, compared with 12% who either identify as Republicans or lean toward the GOP.
Among the public, there are far fewer self-described Democrats (35%) and far more Republicans (23%). Overall, 52% of the public identifies as Democratic or leans Democratic, while 35% identifies as Republican or leans Republican.
So it’s hard to make an argument that the dearth of Republicans in American science is due to bias or discrimination. Nor does the ideological slant seem likely to affect science: as I read somewhere (but can’t lay my hands on the reference), scientists’ politics don’t affect the nature or quality of their research.
Why the disparity between scientists and the public, then, if it’s not bigotry? Well, perhaps it’s preference.
For reasons we can speculate about, perhaps those with a conservative bent are less likely to go into science, or remain in science if they start studying this. Perhaps those with a liberal bent are more attracted to the empirical method and the techniques of science.
Here's a more benign explanation for the time it took for full FDA approval of the vaxxes.
What does full approval of Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine mean?
COVID-19 vaccines were initially rolled out under emergency use authorization, which lets the FDA speed the availability of medical products during emergencies.
Author: MATTHEW PERRONE AP Health Writer
Published: 5:17 AM EDT August 24, 2021
Updated: 5:17 AM EDT August 24, 2021
WASHINGTON — What does full approval of Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine mean?
It means Pfizer’s shot for people 16 and older has now undergone the same rigorous testing and regulatory review as dozens of other long-established vaccines.
COVID-19 vaccines in the U.S. were initially rolled out under the Food and Drug Administration's emergency use authorization, which allows the agency to speed the availability of medical products during public health emergencies.
Under the process, the FDA waived some of its normal data requirements and procedures to make the COVID-19 vaccines available months earlier than would have been possible under normal circumstances.
Pfizer's vaccine — along with those from Moderna and Johnson & Johnson — still underwent testing in tens of thousands of people to establish safety and effectiveness against COVID-19. But the FDA initially required the companies to submit about only two months of safety monitoring data on study participants, the period when side effects are most likely to occur.
For full approval, the FDA required six months of follow-up data. FDA inspectors also visited the plants where the vaccines are made and reviewed each step of the production process for extra assurance that the shots are made under safe, sterile conditions.
Because vaccines are typically given to otherwise healthy individuals, they are generally subject to more regulatory scrutiny than other medical products, including prescription drugs. Full approval means the Pfizer vaccine now carries the FDA’s strongest endorsement of safety and effectiveness.
Public health experts hope the change will convince more unvaccinated people to get the shot and spur more employers to require vaccinations.
Moderna has also applied for full approval, and Johnson & Johnson has said it hopes to apply later in the year.
Pfizer’s shot still is available for 12- to 15-year-olds under emergency use authorization. The full approval also doesn’t apply to boosters. The agency will decide separately whether an extra shot is necessary for healthy people.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
