If you dare to question science you are labelled uneducated?

[Clovesinmyorange]

As the title states.

I’m finding myself getting more and more angry at this attitude.
It’s the current ‘trend’ if you will, that if you dare to question science you are stupid or uneducated. Having some reservations about things, means you are completely wrong and an imbecile.

The worst thing to do in this situation is to tell ‘anti vaxxers’ or people who are hesitant about the vaccine that they are wrong or stupid. This will backfire greatly and it’s certainly not a way of winning them over. This exact thing happened with Brexit too…which is why we are where we are with that.

It’s usually left wing guardian readers (yes I read the guardian) but the same people who are usually very vocal about how supportive they are of other peoples ethics, beliefs and backgrounds.

@XenoBitch you don’t have to answer to anyone. Ignore those who can’t understand your situation.

[quote TheScenicWay]@XenoBitch you don’t have to answer to anyone. Ignore those who can’t understand your situation.[/quote]
They are being deliberately obtuse, I swear.

There's questioning the science and then there's questioning aspects of how the info is presented to the public etc. Two different things...

I am not a scientist, I therefore have no intellectual right to question their basis for how viruses behave, how vaccines are tailored, the affects of the disease on the body etc.

However I question;

• Why people like Susan Miche are given airtime
• Why some of the scientists are in the public eye/press so much to the point of becoming quasi celebrities (Neil Ferguson being one)
• Whether the challenge on people's mental health might actually be more damaging than Covid on an overall population basis, and whether they even bother considering this seriously
• The fact that their prior modelling was either laced with scare tactics, or just massively overstated in error.

I don't think any of those questions are unreasonable, and coming from a place of being ill informed.

@CherryBlossomAutumn I fully understand that but it’s not sustainable to keep locking us down.

I also have a massive issue with the emotive language being used by media and politicians.

I am not anti vax, I’ve had my jabs. I am anti “mandatory vaccines” though. I think everyone has the right to choose. I don’t “question the science” but 1) I feel strongly that the government and media (who have a symbiotic relationship) side strongly on the view that COVID is terrible, we all should be jabbed etc (reality is it’s a mild illness for the majority of the population) 2) agree with a PP that all the measures need to be considered holistically/ in light of other negative effects. Eg WFH, so many are quick to say it’s an “easy measure”- which it is if you work in an office / can easily work from home, but if you run a business dependent on office worker custom - then it’s a terrible measure. If I was running a sandwich shop in the city I’d absolutely be questioning whether the policies make sense.

Broadly speaking I agree though, that people are labelled uneducated if they question this. At least on social media anyway. In my real life circle of friends we all question the policies. And we are all highly educated!

@FinallyGotAnIPhone well said!

[quote Whattochoosenow]@CherryBlossomAutumn I fully understand that but it’s not sustainable to keep locking us down.[/quote]
Which scientists are locking who down?

I think because like all professions different scientists will have different views on Covid.

Not radically different of course for example you would be hard pressed to find a scientist that backed the theory that is all to do with 5G or the Covid doesn't exist nonsense. But you will find some scientists who believe for example that we would better off giving first or second jabs to people in poorer countries (such South Africa) rather than third jabs in the UK, as this would help stop new mutations.

But we need to recognise that there is not one single scientific viewpoint.

The science keeps ‘changing’ (understandably) but it’s made people feel unsure so they now keep questioning things.
I mean things like we shouldn’t wear masks as people didn’t know how to wear them, then we must wear masks everywhere, we needed a vaccine, then 2, then boosters, now more boosters possibly, we’re not sure about natural immunity, but that country is etc.
It’s going to raise questions and form opinions.

@Bwix

Tbh I think this is unreasonable: I am not an expert in French language so I’m not going to argue if the dictionary and French experts say the word for fish is poisson, even if I have a strong inner sense that it ought to be le swim-swim. I don’t understand why people feel their intuition is more valid than years of collaborative study. Perhaps I’ll stop believing in gravity, so I don’t have to climb the stairs.

I actually really want a fish to be called le swim-swim now!

The restrictions we face are are put in place by the government based on the advice of their scientific advisors. Those advisors- the virologists, immunologists, epidemiologists, statisticians etc are advising on Covid. The problem is that there is a whole world of other issues which are currently being neglected such as the mental health of the population, the missed and delayed diagnoses, the massive waiting lists, the failed businesses etc which simply cannot be ignored. We have become fixated on covid at the cost of everything else. There is a failure to look at this holistically.

To give you an example- these new restrictions are supposed to help prevent the NHS becoming overwhelmed. The trouble is that now that people who are not sick are having to isolate, it’s going to mean short staffing within the NHS potentially causing the NHS to be overwhelmed. It’s not just the clinicians who keep it running , it’s the support staff too.

@XenoBitch - anti-vax agenda consistently on MN over the course of the pandemic.

I do agree that the ‘messaging’ is really poor. And by that I mean what the government has done too which isn’t always anything to do with science. The only 4 people, or social distancing, or hand sanitizing. All confusing and not that effective.

And some of the ‘scientists’ have been pretty poor IMHO. A lot of the modeling was terrible, esp at the beginning. And it was the UK SAGE group of scientists who introduced the idea of ‘herd immunity’ to the population - which me and other scientists feel is unforgivable as it is really, really wrong. Herd immunity is never a good plan, partially, wholly, ever. It’s scientific nonsense.

I’d urge anyone who has taken the time to read my small contribution to just forget about all the politics and ‘faff’ and remember this:

• Covid is airborne - almost all transmission is by breathing in the air of an infected person. The most important thing you can understand. In an indoor space, over longer time, the air fills so that you could be sat on the other side of the room and still get it.

- because of this, eating out, nightclubs, schools (yes schools) anywhere where masks aren’t worn and we are inside are a risk. These things can continue to happen but can ONLY happen if we realise that they are major risks, and that we have to minimise it and decide what’s important.

• It’s important to try and keep transmission down. It is NEVER a good idea to just ‘live with it’ or ‘ignore it’ or ‘get it’.
• It’s also important to live our lives, to work and see loved ones. BUT we have to have mitigations in order to do that. Mitigations are: wearing good fitted masks (FFP2s on trains, indoor spaces), ventilation of indoor spaces, HEPA filters. Not really hand sanitising.

That plus vaccination, boosters and having good testing (and isolating ourselves when Covid positive).

Not sure who that’s aimed at- I’m fully vaccinated

[quote PaulGallico]@XenoBitch - anti-vax agenda consistently on MN over the course of the pandemic.[/quote]
Prove it. Honestly. Go.

I am just someone scared to death about the vaccine and potential mandate.

But yes. Prove I am anti vax etc.

I have not even been on MN for the duration of the pandemic.

Not read entire thread, but I think I agree with OP. The way it has become popular to berate and abuse people expressing concerns over the vaccine online is divisive. It reminds me of the way abusing GC feminists is also seen as fair game - and on the right side of history.

I'm double jabbed but I think it's fair to be mistrustful of private companies operating for profit. A lot of them don't have great track records tbf.

Online or IRL abuse isn't going to change anyone's mind.

As a society we have become so divided, we have lost the art of disagreeing and nuanced debate discussion. Yes the vaccine is so important and so much pain and loss has been suffered already, I get why people get angry, I just think it exacerbates the issue and entrenches the opposition.

Sorry I was replying to the anti ax statement, not you @CherryBlossomAutumn

@SayAaa

Science is all about questioning! The hallmark of a good scientist is being able to critically question things and change your mind in the face of new evidence.

Exactly!

You don't need to be a scientist to be a critical thinker. Though you do need to be a critical thinker to be a scientist, which means asking questions.

@Whattochoosenow I understood. I think I might not be up with the thread flow!

@MintJulia

Surely that's an easy one to settle. Do you have a masters in epidemiology or virology and several years of research experience?

If you are an experienced virologist with years of research under your belt, then questioning the science is your job, on behalf of all of us, because you have the knowledge & skills to do so. That is called peer-review and is an essential part of any scientific research.

If you don't have any scientific qualifications, then you simply don't have the knowledge to reach a valid conclusion.

What you believe is up to you, but persuading others to your viewpoint is irresponsible and puts them at risk.

"Do you have a masters in epidemiology or virology and several years of research experience?"

A nice simple question you would think. However, you just have to look at what happened to one of the most qualified on the subject to know that is just not enough. If you are not the right scientist singing the right song, your extensive list of qualifications and experience means nothing! You will be ridiculed, censored, and debunked within the space of 2 days. So what does 'qualified mean? What does misinformation mean? When a well-qualified expert with extensive hands-on field knowledge, is treated in this way and accused of being a conspiracy theorist and anti-vaxxer, gets silenced, you have to start asking why. Not that having no alliances and being independent has anything to do with this. When everything he tried to warn them would happen, is NOW happening, you understand his decades of experience can't just be wiped off Wiki and other medical websites, through mass edits to make his message false. Facts will always be facts, even if no one believes them. Lies will still be lies, even if everyone believes them.
Missing information is misinformation too.
www.voiceforscienceandsolidarity.org/

Preparing for flaming as usual. I don't care about naysayers or Trolls anymore.

@Clovesinmyorange

I’ve been putting my son to bed. I’m reading the replies now.

I was meaning that questioning science shouldn’t be necessarily seen as a bad thing. Of course scientists and epidemiologists are trained and educated in that specific field, but they’re still only human. The same as doctors misdiagnosing patients, which unfortunately seems to happen more than we would like to think.

I don’t think calling people stupid or uneducated is actually helping persuade them to a particular way of thinking. I feel it makes them push against it more and become increasingly more resistant.

But what would you call someone for example who believes the Earth is flat? What is your technique for persuading someone who is so far gone from reality?

@Scottishgirl85

Are you a scientist, OP? I am, and I work for one of the big pharma that produced one of the vaccines. I welcome scientific debate, after all, it is how we achieve innovation. But this needs to be grounded on scientific expertise and evidence. There is a large proportion of the population who suddenly believe they have this expertise (which takes decades to achieve). It is this aspect that I have no time for. Although I will happily explain scientific rationale to those who are interested.

Oh good, it gives me the opportunity to further my knowledge on how the mRNA works in relation to the infected cell and the TLR2 and TLR4 receptors and how that happens due to the furinase cleavage site?

The questions are around the restrictions and rules which don’t always make sense.
Keep questioning them.

What am I supposed to do instead - pretend there’s some credibility in the mad lies told by anti-vaxxers…?