Have you experienced yourself or observed other scientists being attacked for sharing their professional opinions? (select all that apply)

There have been a number of cases over the years - especially in the US and India, the two counties where I have spent my scientific career - of attacks on scientists for their positions on issues.  In India, rationalist have been murdered in high profile cases where convictions have not taken place.

In Instagram accounts I follow

Industry-funded scientists have been attacked for their individualist approaches towards hazards. While during COVID there were many attacks by anti-vaxers and the religious rightwing. 

Again the question depends on the subject under discussion. Environmental scientist and political science experts often face this issue. 

I'm in the WSU Extension Service part time as part of my faculty responsibilities.  My role is to communicate about controversial issues related to crop protection technology (like pesticide chemistry and toxicology).  I've been ad hominem attacked as a shill for industry and have had at least three records request (State FOIA requests) for emails related to organizations/people I communicate with.  I have found primary research literature where authors have used ad hominem argumentation against others, basically accusing them of shilling for industry.  Ironically, I personally haven't taken any industry money in over 25 years and my last grant was from government sources but lately I'm working without grants from anyone.   

I am an expert on the use and appropriateness of amphetamine to sustain the performance of military aviation personnel who due to mission demands are sleep deprived but who nonetheless are required to continue flight operations.  I've been attacked by all sorts of people for my advocacy of these medications under specific operational conditions.

Social media tends to paint us in a bad light now days. 

I have only seen scientists being attacked for sharing their personal opinions.

Friends have attacked me

both scientists and non scientist insulted me and other colleagues on social media because we did not support their beliefs.

This is in the context of product safety litigation.

I have observed scientists working on Covid-19 suffering unfair and unjustified attacks without scientific base.

During the Covid 19 pandemic I was very cautious about unproven treatments being touted.  I was attacked for holding the view that unproven medicines such as Ivermectin should be approved for therapeutic use absent trial results.

Yes, scientists have faced attacks for expressing their professional opinions, especially on controversial topics like climate change or vaccines. These attacks can come from individuals or groups with opposing views, leading to personal and professional backlash.

I have witnessed attacks on scientists due to their Climate Change viwes.

My facility was attacked by anti-fracking protesters despite my institute not doing any fracking or being involved. They occupied and damaged the building and sent threatening messages. 

No may be few numbers. 

Some politicians and activists attack a proven scientifically established knowledge of the "use of contraceptives usage" to prevent pregnancy.

For over 2 decades, I have been the subject of intellectual and professional attacks by members of organized medicine at NCI/NIH-HHS.  My challenging efforts to promote the role of Inflammation/immunity in cancer research, diagnosis and therapy initially were severely opposed, denied, minimized and submitted concepts, comprehensive proposals and lectures were rejected. The novel proposals were extension of our accidental discoveries that we established at the University of Pennsylvania on experimental models of acute and chronic inflammatory diseases and resulted in multistep tumorigenesis and angiogenesis.   While I became the target of repeated professional harassment, in the last couple of decades, my efforts seem awakened the entire cancer community around the world. My submitted proposals were fragmented and used as front to collect more money from taxpayers.  The intellectual harassment and bullying, along with censoring or silencing of independent and competent professionals (“Intellectual Me Too”) present grave concerns, far greater compared with the sexual harassment of ‘Me Too’ movement that were recently spearheaded by NIH decision makers (my recent articles).  As an example, members of organized medicine (politician-scientists) at NCI/NIH bribed $60 million to one handler and promoted many others for preventing me to continue our pioneering studies or finding any other position at any institutions around the world (NCI/NIH scientific and legal documents since 1998).  

I have heard people against the development and study of new viruses/bacterial strains in order to prepare for worst case scenarios. They fear the release of these would cause another pandemic. 

Dr Anthony Fauci deliberately lied his way through the origin and course of the coronavirus epidemic.  He continues to lie  to this day.  The federal government backed up his intimidation tactics and just plain lied their *ss off.

As gynaecologist and scientist I performed research into COVID19 in pregnancy, had several interviews on the radio, newspapers and on television, and I strongly voiced recommendations about the need to get the vaccinations (based on scientific evidence)

I am not sure attacks are common.

I have not personally encountered any instances of attacks. However, I have observed two distinct forms of attacks directed towards fellow scientists:

I was nominated by President Trump to lead part of US EPA.  The resulting firestorm of mis-information about my credentials and career were "surprising."

I've seen a lot of attacks on COVID researchers advocating for maintaining mitigation strategies on social media.

scientist can be attacked for expressing informed opinions going against mainstream paradigms

My experience with this spans many issues such as EPA/IRIS risk characterizations, the endocrine disruption debate, and others.  While most of the personal attacks have come from environmentalists in the NGO community, the media and community activists, on fewer occasions I've encountered regulatory agency employees engaging in this type of tactic.

Several of my research colleagues have been criticized for arriving at research conclusions that are not in line with the contemporary political correctness.

This is usually very hard from commoners to digest scientific facts and sometime it create unpleasant situation for scientists 

"Attacked" is too strong a word, but I have faced arguments with people who do not understand the science behind vaccines or drug development and contend that there are non-scientific shenanigans of some sort driving healthcare decisions.

THERE HAVE BEEN SEVERAL INSTANCES WHERE WE AS SCIENTIST FACE THE WRATH FROM OUR POLITICIANS FOR NOT BEING ABLE TO DELIVER. ONE ASPECT, THAT SEEMS FORGOTTEN IS THAT THE RESULTS OR THE OUTCOMES DONT COME BY OVERNIGHT. WHEREAS , THE GENERAL PUBLIC SEEMS HAVE A NOTION THAT SCIENCE WORKS AS A SWITCH AND EVERYTHING THAT IS BEING PROPOSED CAN BE ACHIEVEABLE. SOME OF THE MOST ASTONISHING QUESTIONS COME FROM THE POLITICIANS AND REGULATORS. IN SOME INSTANCE THE SCIENTIST WHO HAVE LEFT SCIENCE QUESTION THE CREDIBILITY OF THE SCIENTIST PURSUING THE OBJECTIVES.

There was a pharmaceutical firm that tried to attack the scientist that has tried to check the quality of their drug.

My position on the science was challenged not on its scientific merits, but rather on my employment within industry.   

I observed on media particularly politicians, businesses and citizen attacking scientists on their recommendations on COVID-19 lock-ups, mask mandates and vaccines

Lobbyists and activists have questioned my integrity due to my positions/evidence interpretations, and similarly attacked my colleagues in blogs and other media

I published research on vaccines and autism and was sent threatening letters and email.

Much of what I have seen is related to COVID-19, but I have also seen scientists attacked regarding obesity research. In particular, I've seen scientists attacked over use of BMI, "triggering eating disorders" in children, and "trying to parent other people's children" with lifestyle behavior recommendations. Most of this has occurred on Twitter.

We as a scientists do hard work for the fruitful research but sometime hypothesis and experiments do not give the similar findings than people criticize for our abilities. 

I did see this trending attacks on Covid Vaccine.

Unfortunately, some scientists build their careers on unrealistic hypotheses. One of my studies revealed results that contradicted the "theory" of a GOD scientist. He asked me for a meeting. We met we spoke quietly until the point that he started shooting and saying that this was not true. I sent him raw data from my experiment (repeated 5 times) generated from a measuring device (not handmade).   

I was personally vilified for positions I took that were critical of "stated preference" based ecosystem valuations. This period was during a time that we (USDA) were attempting to bring greater precision and discipline into the environmental markets realm. 
I have observed other scientists in the climate and carbon cycle space being personally challenged for biases.

The best example is outrage of public opinion in regards to SARS-CoV-2 virus, but very often it is just regarding cause and effect sentences.

NGOs/journalists using terms such as "opinion for hire", biased due to conflicts, paid consultant, 

colleague expelled from academia for work on tobacco harm reduction
colleague attacked for research on harmful side-effects of covid-19 vaccines 

The one who asks need to define "attack" first. If you mean personal bodily attack, then no. No Catholic Inquisition and burining at the stake.....yet.

If the one who asks means verbal "attack" (a vehement disagreement can be labeled as "attack" but it should not be), then yes.

Have been attacked by other academics for not sharing opinions on the ethics of research, and have been labelled as "under the control of industry" by those in the not-for-profit sector for having research grants partially funded by industrial scholarship. 

In Mexico's current political landscape, the scientific community (and in general, informed expertise) has been repeatedly been the target of very public attacks by political figures for presenting data and evidence that contradicts the ruling party's political narrative. 

Covid vaccines

At the beginning of my research, I was attacked by a senion researcher for my opinion on biosimilars

My post-doc guide told me to work on a paper. After some months, I found that the paper has been published in a reputed journal without my name.

I worked in the pesticide industry, and received tremendous blowback from activist groups and plaintiff’s attorneys when I cited solid scientific, factual information that was counter to their beliefs.

I conduct secondary data analyses involving COVID-19. I have been ridiculed in the past and more recently for bringing to light obvious problems (e.g., exponential increase in long COVID prevalence).

My colleague was critized because he used cats for his neuroscience experiments.

Aside from instances covered by the media, I have not been personally attacked or observed other scientists being attacked.

I have done work on pesticides and have been attacked by members of the agricultural community and by legislators. 

During the pandemic, people were divided about doing lock downs and setting of rules. There were plenty of opinions surrounding what to do. 

Being told that I’m being fed lies about COVID vaccine effectiveness.  Or that I’m not being truthful. 

I have promoted vaccination in some newspaper articles and I have been attacked 

My experience has been more with subterfuge rather then outright attacks. In this day and age there is alot more subterfuge that happens then the outright attacks on Oppenheimer.