“The point is not who is right and who is wrong about airborne transmission. The point is not science, but safety. Scientific knowledge changes constantly. Yesterday’s scientific dogma is today’s discarded fable. When it comes to worker safety in hospitals, we should not be driven by the scientific dogma…
“The point is not who is right and who is wrong about airborne transmission. The point is not science, but safety. Scientific knowledge changes constantly. Yesterday’s scientific dogma is today’s discarded fable. When it comes to worker safety in hospitals, we should not be driven by the scientific dogma of yesterday or even the scientific dogma of today. We should be driven by the precautionary principle that reasonable steps to reduce risk should not await scientific certainty.”
Oh wait, that’s from the SARS Commission report two decades ago. Walport is absolutely correct to call out the atrocious science communication from our official scientists. Absence of evidence is not necessarily evidence, yet time and time again the bureaucrats exuded certainty where there was none and had to backtrack.
I closely followed the scientific developments during COVID and was dismayed that our officials were constantly two to six months behind reality. I felt like Cassandra, cursed with the ability to see the future. The outdated and overconfident official advice was not only useless, it was destructive. Normal people could smell a rat. Convoy types and COVID maximalists both railed against official advice. Eventually everyone stopped listening as the bureaucrats retreated to a weird religiosity: “Trust The Science”.
If The Science is ever to be trusted again, official scientists need to tell us what they don’t know just as much as what they do know.
JW I felt the same way throughout. Thanks for putting that into words. How frustrating it was, especially considering we already had a very good post-SARS Pandemic Influenza Plan (co-written by Theresa Tam) from 2004.
I particularly liked this passage:
“The point is not who is right and who is wrong about airborne transmission. The point is not science, but safety. Scientific knowledge changes constantly. Yesterday’s scientific dogma is today’s discarded fable. When it comes to worker safety in hospitals, we should not be driven by the scientific dogma of yesterday or even the scientific dogma of today. We should be driven by the precautionary principle that reasonable steps to reduce risk should not await scientific certainty.”
Oh wait, that’s from the SARS Commission report two decades ago. Walport is absolutely correct to call out the atrocious science communication from our official scientists. Absence of evidence is not necessarily evidence, yet time and time again the bureaucrats exuded certainty where there was none and had to backtrack.
I closely followed the scientific developments during COVID and was dismayed that our officials were constantly two to six months behind reality. I felt like Cassandra, cursed with the ability to see the future. The outdated and overconfident official advice was not only useless, it was destructive. Normal people could smell a rat. Convoy types and COVID maximalists both railed against official advice. Eventually everyone stopped listening as the bureaucrats retreated to a weird religiosity: “Trust The Science”.
If The Science is ever to be trusted again, official scientists need to tell us what they don’t know just as much as what they do know.
JW I felt the same way throughout. Thanks for putting that into words. How frustrating it was, especially considering we already had a very good post-SARS Pandemic Influenza Plan (co-written by Theresa Tam) from 2004.
Paywalled but the headline says most of it https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2024-10-09/michael-osterholm-how-scientists-and-public-health-officials-can-build-trust