scientific integrity
Credit: Billie Grace Ward/Flickr
Republicans’ growing distrust in science is a danger to public health
A widening political divide shows Republicans increasingly losing faith in science, raising concerns about the public health impacts of this skepticism, especially as misinformation about vaccines and climate change spreads.
In short:
- Republican distrust in science has surged from 14% in 2020 to 38% in 2023, while Democrats’ confidence has remained relatively stable.
- Misinformation, amplified during the COVID-19 pandemic, has fueled skepticism of vaccines, climate change, and public health measures.
- Political identity, particularly within the MAGA movement, plays a crucial role in shaping these views, exacerbating the partisan gap.
Key quote:
“Americans died because they had read or heard that mRNA vaccines were more dangerous than a bout of Covid.”
— Matthew Dallek, political historian at George Washington University
Why this matters:
Science should be society’s best way of understanding the world, not a pawn in our political battles. The more we politicize it, the more we open the door for denialism to creep in, leaving us all worse off—environmentally and in terms of public health. Read more: America re-discovers anti-science in its midst.
Keep reading...Show less
Credit: fortheloveofcc/Flickr
Debating science in a court setting may boost public trust
Holding science-based courtroom debates could help educate and engage citizens in shaping public policy.
In short:
- A citizens' jury on genome editing, funded by Wellcome Trust, exemplified a non-traditional method of public engagement in science policy.
- Trust in scientists has declined significantly, highlighting the need for inclusive decision-making involving both experts and the public.
- Science courts, modeled on the U.S. court system, could address policy questions with scientific expertise to foster informed public trust.
Why this matters:
Improving public trust in science through participatory methods can lead to better-informed health policies and greater societal acceptance of scientific advancements. Read more: EPA’s “scientific integrity” program lacks teeth, group alleges.
Keep reading...Show less
Newsletter
Credit: Fabio Rossi/Flickr
Natural gas study draws criticism over industry influence
A recent report led by former U.S. Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz and funded by the natural gas industry, has faced backlash for downplaying the climate impact of natural gas.
In short:
- The report was funded by the natural gas industry and is said to favor LNG despite climate concerns.
- A congressional investigation revealed that oil and gas companies have been downplaying the climate impact of natural gas.
- Some scientists argue the climate impact of natural gas is as bad as or worse than coal.
Key quote:
"The facts presented then and subsequent research from RMI and peers have confirmed that leaks of methane, the main ingredient in natural gas, even at small amounts, make it as bad as or worse than coal for the climate and not necessarily the cleaner alternative it was once thought to be."
— Amory Lovins, cofounder and former chief scientist for the Rocky Mountain Institute
Why this matters:
Understanding the industry's influence on reports like this one is crucial to ensure policies are based on objective science. Read more: EPA’s “scientific integrity” program lacks teeth, group alleges.
Keep reading...Show less
Credit: South Florida Water Management District/Flickr
Court drama disrupts a key environmental alliance in Florida
A legal battle between the Everglades Foundation and a former scientist has sparked controversy, highlighting a clash over environmental policy and personal integrity.
In short:
- The Everglades Foundation's lawsuit against former scientist Tom Van Lent has caused division within one of the nation's leading environmental coalitions.
- Allegations of "trade secrets" theft and data destruction by Van Lent have led to legal consequences, including bankruptcy and potential jail time.
- This dispute has raised concerns about the impact of internal conflicts on the broader effort to restore the Everglades, a critical environmental project.
Key quote:
“A 2022 employment matter does not impact those of us who are mission-focused on restoration and the environment. The Everglades is the priority.”
— Jacquie Weisblum, Everglades Foundation’s VP of communications
Why this matters:
This conflict brings to light the challenges of maintaining unity among allies in the fight for environmental causes, especially when personal and political agendas may interfere with collaborative efforts for the greater good. How did we get here? Together, we make mud: Environmental politics at the start of a new decade.
Keep reading...Show less
Credit: Nosnibor137/BigStock Photo ID: 41646235
Scientists and academics navigate the challenging world of expert testimony
In a recent exploration by Science, Dan Charles delves into the intricate role of scientists serving as expert witnesses in legal disputes, highlighting both the opportunities and challenges this responsibility entails.
In short:
- Academics often find themselves in the complex role of expert witnesses in court, balancing the potential benefits against the risks of being perceived as biased or commercially motivated.
- The use of scientific expertise in legal battles, such as the recent case questioning acetaminophen's link to autism and ADHD, underscores the high stakes involved, including significant financial implications.
- While some researchers embrace the opportunity to apply their knowledge for justice, others are wary of the adversarial nature of courtrooms and the potential for professional and personal repercussions.
Key quote:
“It was absolutely an ethical responsibility."— Shanna Swan, epidemiologist at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, and scientist at Environmental Health Sciences
Why this matters:
It's important to understand that testimony by scientists has real-world consequences for people's lives and health, not just for the litigants, but also for the scientists who often endure withering personal and professional attacks. WATCH: Investigative reporter talks about Bayer/Monsanto's efforts to discredit her work.
Keep reading...Show less
Newsletter
Credit: UCAR SciEd/Flickr
‘Smoking gun proof’: fossil fuel industry knew of climate danger as early as 1954, documents show
Documents show industry-backed Air Pollution Foundation uncovered the severe harm climate change would wreak
Photo by Vlad Tchompalov on Unsplash
Will the American Geophysical Union cut all ties with the fossil fuel industry?
Scientist-activists ask the world’s biggest society of earth and space scientists to revoke the fossil fuel industry’s social license.
ORIGINAL REPORTING
MOST POPULAR
CLIMATE
