We Need More Distrust Of Science

^{We live at a time of unprecedented scientific and technological progress, and, yet, there's widespread confusion and concern about the impacts of scientific and technological advances on human health and therefore the environment. Among the highly contested issues are genetically modified (GM) crops, vaccines, endocrine‐disrupting chemicals, pesticides, telephone electromagnetic emissions, salt intake, obesity, smokeless tobacco, electronic cigarettes, particulate pollution, hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”) to extract gas and global climate change. It's fair to mention that, on many issues, this confusion isn't limited to the lay public but also affects government agencies, professional organizations, and therefore the scientific community. One among the risks of such widespread and persisting confusion about these issues is that it contributes to an increasing public distrust of science since scientists are seemingly incapable of resolving these controversies. During the past 5–10 years, much has been written about “distrust of science” and its root causes, with journalists, scientists, physicians, psychologists, and sociologists all contributing to the present discussion. While this work contains valuable insights and perspectives on the matter, many authors make sweeping generalizations and lump together disparate questions that involve different methodologies and kinds of evidence. Reading this literature, it's striking what percentage of commentators conflate controversies about vaccines and autism, GM crops, pesticides, and global climate change as if these were all instances of one phenomenon. The failure to properly distinguish between these different controversies—and the science concerning them—has encouraged a bent to stress the “scientific consensus”, and to say that “in the top, science, if not individual scientists, tend to urge it right”.}

By: Jyoti Nayak

Birla School, Pilani