Science and Scientific Controversy, Journalists and Parents
“Some alleged ’scientific’ disputes are more or less invented out of whole cloth, creating controversy where, among scientists, none actually exists,” writes Dennis Myers in the March 7 NewsReview.com (Reno). A hypothesis linking abortion to breast cancer—the “ABC link”—is regarded as a “myth” by the scientific community (see this report from the National Cancer Institute). There is “virtually no evidence to support” such a link, as is the case for a vaccine-autism link. Myers further writes about how “journalism often functions to distort the debate” in disputes about science:
The reporter cranks out a report with a sound bite from each side, then leaves the reader or viewer adrift, with no guidance on who is right. “The real jerks are the ones who take a 200-scientist report that took three years to write with three rounds of reviews, give it two inches, and then go get two guys funded by Exxon, give them two inches, and say they’re equally credible,” said Stanford biologist Stephen Schneider, who has posted a discussion of “mediarology” on his Web site (http://stephenschneider.stanford.edu/).
………..
Sometimes news coverage is simply misleading, as when reporters portray science in competition not with science but with ideology or dogma or commerce or religion. Scientists should be allowed to compete with informed criticism of their work by informed and unconvinced competing experts. ………..
Back on January 13th, a debate was held between Arthur Allen, author of Vaccine: The Controversial Story of Medicine’s Greatest Lifesaver and David Kirby, author of Evidence of Harm: Mercury in Vaccines and the Autism Epidemic: A Medical Controversy. The topic of the debate was whether thimerasol, a mercury-containing vaccine preservative, had caused an “epidemic of autism.” It was a debate, that is, between two journalists on a scientific question for which there is virtually no scientific evidence.
Myers has this to say about a thimerasol-autism link:
Local news coverage of thimerosal, a mercury-laced vaccine preservative linked to a sharp rise in autism among children, often pits scientists not against each other, but it pits parents against scientists–a no-win proposition for the scientists, no matter what the science. It is neither responsible nor informative for journalists to set up these unbalanced contests between informed and uninformed, emotion and intellect. Reporters, however, are usually under heavy pressure from their news management to use ratings- and circulation-inducing “real people” in stories.
When it comes to reporting on autism, there is a serious gap between the mass media (which is far more interested in stories about environmental factors) and scientific research (which is focused much more on research on the brain, genetics, and behavior), as a study by Stanford researchers published in the February issue of Nature Reviews Neuroscience noted.
Why the gap?
Or, to put the question another way, what kinds of “science” is a parent, worried about how to help an autistic child and with little time, more likely to read through……..
Related Stories
POSTED IN: Environment, Epidemic, Health, Media, Science, Vaccines
8 opinions for Science and Scientific Controversy, Journalists and Parents
Lisa/Jedi
Mar 8, 2007 at 10:41 am
We do seem to live in a science-phobic society. I can’t tell you how many times, when I mentioned that I worked in microbiology, that the response was “I could never understand that stuff…” I can’t help but feel that some people carry a lot of baggage about science & scientists & feeling intimidated by people they perceive may be smarter than they are. Perhaps it would be better to speak of accurate information vs inaccurate, with the accurate info being based on scientific evidence. Then people wouldn’t be intimidated by the “science” part & perhaps would be more willing to accept helpful information… just a thought.
Kristina Chew, PhD
Mar 8, 2007 at 1:31 pm
I like that distinction, Lisa. My own knowledge of science has been in hibernation, so to speak, until having to learn about things regarding Charlie—and in writing about them here.
Julie
Mar 8, 2007 at 1:41 pm
I love all that was written here. Information is the key to helping our children. I feel that if the focus came off who did this to our children and focused on how to better help them and the families we would all be better off.
Liz
Mar 8, 2007 at 3:51 pm
Thanks for posting the Meyers article, Kristina, I wouldn’t have seen it.
It will be useful in settings other than autism, such as the pathetic coverage of reading issues and remediating dyslexia.
arthur allen
Mar 9, 2007 at 8:43 am
I don’t think that non-scientists should be excluded from holding forth in the public square in discussions of science. I was about to add “as long as they’ve done their homework,” but then again, how much homework is required? Although the overwhelming evidence and scientific consensus holds with there being nothing to the vaccines-cause-autism theory, there continues to be legitimate research into possible harm from thimerosal.
However, the main reason I participated in the debate with Kirby is to try to communicate with that alarming group of parents who continue to blame vaccines for autism. This is an idea with public health impact; it certainly adds to the rolls of parents who refuse to vaccinate their children. I wanted to present a convincing body of evidence to those who clutch to this theory; even if I don’t change their minds now, they’ll have some content to return to when their emotional attachment to the theory fades.
Kristina Chew, PhD
Mar 9, 2007 at 10:19 am
It’s the “emotional attachment” that parents have to the vaccine-autism theory (and to other theories) that I keep detecting and trying to understand (and that leads me to be especially appreciative of the “body of evidence” in Vaccine). As a non-scientist, I have often felt extremely hesitant—even after study and reflection—to hold forth on scientific issues; in the process of doing so here on this weblog, I have learned, though, why it is all the more imperative to do so. Thanks very much for commenting here, Mr. Allen.
Autism Vox » Autism Speaks Now
Apr 6, 2007 at 2:42 am
[…] autism, there is a serious gap between scientific research and the mass media; in the case of some reporting on thimerasol and autism, parents are pitted against scientists. Autism Speaks, with its access to the full power of the […]
They Have To Be A Little More Careful With These Titles (2)
Sep 11, 2007 at 6:10 pm
[…] full story is at the BBC news and underscores the gap between scientific research and journalists (and throw in some bloggers, and things can get rather messy). Not all the news is fit to print, […]
Have an opinion? Leave a comment: