To ask to what extent you trust science?

I have zero faith in vaccines that are developed in a matter of months ie Covid vaccines, boosters etc.

I should have said in my previous post, I'm really sorry you've been affected by drug side effects. I think - hope! - most scientists would be the first to step forward and acknowledge that science isn't perfect and while a drug might be net beneficial on a population level, individual harms can and do happen. I think sometimes, though, scientists/medics can get a bit overly defensive. On a human level it's a natural instinct to be defensive when you feel criticised. But also with all the messaging about how people have 'had enough of experts', anti-vaxxers etc etc, when you're really just trying to do your bit to improve human health it's hard not to leap straight on the defence. But it's certainly not the best response when someone has suffered harm.

It’s a really odd, unanswerable question. I suppose if I was pushed I’d say yes, I trust science over, for example, blind faith or religion. It depends what you’re actually asking and what you mean by “science”.

If you’re asking does science always produce good outcomes, then self-evidently the answer is no. However, do I believe in science as a method of better understanding the world around us and solving problems - then yes.

I trust scientists as much as I trust any human beings. Which is not at all.

Leeches are still used: www.hey.nhs.uk/patient-leaflet/leech-therapy/

‘Science’ is just knowledge. Current knowledge. Which will change.

It isn’t a static ‘thing’, or an objective reality. It’s just what humans ‘know’ at any given point in time. ‘Science’ is always in a state of flux in one way or another.

Thank you for this, very interesting.

I'd love to see this happening in a broader sense but as you say, it's baby steps. I had to pay a lot for a private pharmacogenetics test and of course, it showed I was at risk of being more severely affected by drugs like antipsychotics, which the test said to avoid 😳😫😳 Hindsight is a wonderful thing...

I trust scientific method far more than I trust ancient wisdom, religious ideology or lived experience.

The problem that we have at the moment is around funding of research - those who have the means to fund it, often interfere in the process of what is researched and publishing/not publishing of results. See pharmaceutical and food industries.

I don't think there is enough independent funding for people to look at non profitable areas of scientific study.

@ForeverDelayedEpiphany it's baby steps, but it's coming https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/dg59

I think this minimising of female ill health is one of the biggest problems with modern medical science actually.

More women scientists then. And a society that supports and values that (would be nice).

😂

Some people have.

And some people never left.

This, absolutely this. And of course, if the NHS could ever afford it (ha...!), something like pharmacogenetics tests to prevent drug injury like mine. And to see which medication is the most effective/safest to use for each individual.

I'm living in cloud cuckooaland, obviously, but one day, in an ideal world...

Should we just go back to religion and witchcraft?

The Science!
Thats a very broad church, and I don’t think you can make blanket statements about it. For instance, I absolutely trust astronomy and astrophysics, it’s just learning about the universe. Do I trust medicine? That’s a trickier one, because while it has made massive improvements to the lot of humanity, such as the near eradication of certain diseases, it also has a history of embracing fads and making terrible mistakes. Yes, chemo and radiotherapy are brutal, but the much heralded immunotherapy has now shown to not be the nearly side effect free solution it promised to be, giving people inflammation problems such horrendous colitis.
As for ‘ancient wisdom’, such as what? Galenic medicine? Astrology? Trepanning? If it’s ancient and it works, such as geometry, then it’s just wisdom. Getting touched by the king to cure scrofula? That’s just bollox.

Some science is based on ancient wisdom. Aspirin and vaccinations off the top of my head.

Trouble is, it's difficult to discuss science as a singular entity because it wouldn't exist if humans didn't. It is shaped by humans at every level, and cannot be entirely separated from ethics, morals and money. Even if we hand everything over to AI, currently AI is informed by humans therefore still prone to human bias. If, big IF, an AI really does come about that can think "for itself" I will be giving Terminator 2 side eye and possibly digging a bunker.

The issue with the Covid narrative was little to do with actual science. It was mired in political grandstanding, disaster capitalism and media drama. I remember watching Chris Witty on the daily fraudcasts and thinking he looked like a man whose family were being held at gunpoint off camera.

One might think the majority of the population are complete idiots, but I reckon a slightly less apocalyptic approach would have helped allay some of the wilder conspiracy theories.

And here we are, a scant 4 years down the line "living with it". Yes, it's real, yes it killed lots of people, yes the vaccines protect some people, but overall the government's approach damaged so much, including some people's attitude to science.

I think this minimising of female ill health is one of the biggest problems with modern medical science actually. I've read women on here who are suicidal or contemplating terminating a much wanted pregnancy because of HG. They absolutely deserve just as much medical rigor as cancer patients.

And evidence/scientific studies to show how toxic pesticides are on human health are certainly there. I think in some studies, it has shown to be a potential cause of diseases like Parkinson's. I can certainly attest to my symptoms becoming much worse when I've used flea spray for cats, which are similar to the way pesticides work. And I remember reading how the first antipsychotics were developed from insecticides. Food for thought 🤔

That's about ethics and ethical frameworks, which is in the realm of philosophy, not science. Scientific practice does indeed think a good deal about ethical practice and ethical research. When it comes to weapons development, that's a personal and a political issue, not a scientific one, and decisions have to be taken in the context of a realpolitik in which countries have defence needs. I don't recall that "ancient wisdom" had a great deal to say about that.

I don't trust medical science much any more.

Although it saved my life on many occasions literally from birth - being 3 months premature, later in life having a emergency c-section, and emergency ectopic pregnancy surgery - I was injured permanently by an off label antipsychotic after a head injury and post concussion syndrome 9 years ago.... so it's been swings and roundabouts with me and my health. The number of doctors, supposedly trusted highly respected professionals, who have gaslighted me too, have been quite a few. I think I'm less trusting now of medication to help me now.

Of course, I was incredibly unlucky and am now subsequently a bit biased. But I still get the feeling all is not what it seems.

I mean, given that thalidomide is now used to treat a range of cancers, particularly multiple myeloma, as well as leprosy...maybe?

I’ve embraced all kinds of treatments I don’t really understand - vaccines, ADHD medication, weight loss injections - so I put faith in the data while accepting there’s always risk involved.

I do hate it when people think the pharmaceutical industry owns medicine and that anything that isn’t proven in a double blind gold blah blah blah study can’t possibly be effective though. But I don’t blame science for that!

No they won't, wisdom involves values aswell as knowledge and science can not give us answers on the former. Science can build the bomb but it cannot tell us where or when or if to use it.

We have nothing in common, biologically, to apes.