(Sun, 31 Jan 2010 15:27:00 +0000)
# 4309
Although I am not a scientist, I try to keep this blog centered around what passes for our currently accepted understanding of medicine, scientific research, and emerging infectious diseases.
Not that science is always right. It isn’t.
Our knowledge base – and more importantly, our understanding of how things work - is constantly changing. I would like to be an optimist, and say `constantly expanding’, but things don’t always progress in a linear fashion.
There are many areas, of course, where we have no answers. Or just partial answers. And many of the things we believe to be true today will eventually be discarded into the `bad idea’ pile of tomorrow.
That’s how science works. Absolutes are few and far between. And the process of getting there is often messy.
For some, this lack of definitive answers – or immutable truths – renders science useless . . . or at least highly suspect. Since it isn’t always perfect, and our understandings are subject to change, they place science into the realm of guesswork or speculation.
They don’t understand that knowledge isn’t a destination . . . it’s a journey.
Historically science has always labored under the burden of public misconception and distrust. Advances in science usually mean change. And while change can be good, it isn’t always so.
And for those who prefer (or depend) on the status quo being maintained . . . well science can be a threat.
The popular public perception of scientific research – at least up until the 1940s – was that of the mad scientist. The Dr. Frankenstein, who meddles with things not meant for man to know – or of the inventor’s of mustard gas or chlorine used during World War I.
Gradually, during the 1950s and 1960s (when I grew up), science took on a new, more positive image.
Space flight, jet planes, even computers . . we were entering a world of science-fiction-turned fact. And I suspect that for a lot of us raised during that period, we view science a bit differently than those that came along later.
My heroes growing up were writers like Isaac Asimov (whose numerous non-fiction books tried to explain science to the layman), the Mercury Astronauts, Don Herbert (aka Mr. Wizard) and Dr. Frank Baxter.
Okay, I was a geek before it was fashionable.
Frank C. Baxter (left) and Eddie Albert from Our Mr. Sun
For those with long memories, Frank Baxter was the `scientist’ host of a series of educational films from the 1950’s created by Bell Laboratories. If you’ve never seen any of these Bell Science presentations, I have several archived on my other blog.
You can read my tribute to the man in my essay Remembering Dr. Frank Baxter.
So I come by this reverence – or at least respect - for science honestly. I grew up believing that though science we can make the is world a better place.
And most days, I still do.
But I’m genuinely worried that the proliferation (and apparent popularity) of conspiracy-driven fringe-pseudoscience diminishes those prospects greatly.
The anti-vaccine hysteria of 2009, which obviously turned a lot of people off from the flu shot, is a prime example. Next time we may be hit by a much more virulent virus, and this sort of anti-vaccine fear mongering could end up costing a lot of lives.
My generation, which saw the possibilities of the future, seems to have been followed by a cynical and suspicious Generation X-Files which sees shadowy conspiracies behind every government agency.
Vaccines, they believe, are poisons used to depopulate the planet. Pandemics aren’t naturally occurring events, they are man-made in a laboratory somewhere. Our government’s only interest is to enrich big pharma. And just about everything the government does is a prelude to martial law . . .
My RSS feed aggregator brings me hundreds of news articles, editorials, and blog posts from around the world each day. And a disturbing (and growing) percentage fall into the categories above.
This sort of dreck is apparently very popular, and drives a lot of traffic to these sites. Let’s face it. In the Internet business model, traffic equals revenue.
Like the carnival side show, it really doesn’t matter what’s inside the tent. All that matters is that people are enticed into paying their `one thin dime, 1/10th of a dollar’ to take a peek.
The sad thing here is that there are hundreds of really good journalists and bloggers out there that work diligently to provide good information and analysis, but their efforts are increasingly being overshadowed by these contrarians at the gate.
While I sometimes succumb to temptation and attempt to highlight and critique some of the more egregious examples of this internet drivel, most days I try to resist.
The last thing I want is to drive traffic to these sites. Besides . . . once you start down that path . . . where do you stop?
I’d have time for little else.
So I usually swallow hard and choose to highlight a good journalist, website, or blogger instead (see Reliable Sources In Flublogia).
After all, ‘Tis said it is better to light a candle than curse the darkness ‘
Sadly, though, it never is as cathartic as a good old fashioned rant.
Not even close.
