Declining Public Trust in Science

Americans’ trust in the scientific establishment took another hit last week with the revelation that a prominent advocate of treatment for transgender youth suppressed findings from his government-sponsored research showing that – block blockers. when he does that improve mental health in children with depression. Johanna Olson-Kennedy worries that the study’s findings will be “used” by opponents of the transgender treatment she advocates. This confirms suspicions that scientists and their publications are less interested in seeking the truth than they are in advancing progressive political agendas.

This advocacy extends to party politics itself. In the second presidential election in its history, Scientific American It encouraged readers to “Vote Kamala Harris to Support Science, Health and the Environment.” Two months before that, Naturethe prestigious British science publication, praised Harris’ background as the daughter of a scientist and her support for various STEM initiatives, a single-payer health insurance program, opt-out rights and climate change, he is happy that his election has “raised hope among scientists.” .”

Both publications broke with their cultural neutrality in 2020 when they endorsed Joe Biden. Likewise, it is often non-political New England Journal of Medicine published an October 2020 article criticizing the Trump administration and comparing its response to the pandemic to that of China, which “chose isolation and isolation.” Trump administration officials, the editor said, “were dangerously ignorant. We shouldn’t support them and let thousands of other Americans die by allowing them to keep their jobs.” of them.”

It had never been known, from countries like Sweden, that lockdowns were unnecessary and that Chinese officials suppressed information about the Covid outbreak and unreported cases and deaths. In fact, a study I co-authored found that the US has adopted shutdown policies New England Journal of Medicine and other recommended articles had no better health outcomes than countries that rejected them—and far worse economic and educational outcomes. Despite the approval of Covid-19 vaccines in December 2020, deaths due to Covid-19 were higher in 2021 (460,513), Biden’s first year in office, than in 2020 (384,535), when officials Trump’s lacked a vaccine.

It is remarkable that these scientific journals have returned to politics as the two leading journals—yes Los Angeles Times and Washington Post– have announced that they will not accept a candidate this year. Similarly, moving away from union political advocacy, the International Union of Firefighters and Teamsters have announced they will not endorse a presidential candidate this year. But scientific journals seem intent on furthering their political agenda—facts, accuracy, and results will be criticized.

These political conflicts have weakened American confidence in scientific research. A survey conducted during the pandemic found that people believe that scientific research and recommendations are politically motivated. NatureThe 2020 agreements did not change the views of Biden or Trump, but they reduced trust in the publication and others, as well as scientists in general. And it’s not just Trump supporters whose hopes are falling. A Pew Research Center survey found that the erosion of public trust in medical scientists continues among Republicans and Democrats in the wake of the pandemic.

Scientists and their literature should stick to objective science and leave political science to others.

Image: sommart/iStock/Getty Images Plus