Guest post: They believed science was in the clutches of ‘big’ everything

Originally a comment by iknklast on Break everything.

As for how [anti-vaxxers] can live with themselves, they are sure they are doing the opposite of killing people. They believe they are saving people. (I don’t think that’s the case with Trump; I think he doesn’t think at all, and doesn’t give a damn about anyone but himself.)

I met a lot of anti-vaxxers in the years I was part of the environmental science program in my doctoral program. For the most part, they were the youngsters, those born after we managed to solve so many problems of diseases. They had been raised on a media drumbeat of the evils of big Pharma, big Medicine, and science denialism, but they didn’t believe it was science denialism. They don’t remember what it was like to have half the class out with the measles, mumps, or other diseases, and the risk that came from these diseases. They grew up in a world where the diseases were not manifest in large numbers. If people are so healthy, why do we need vaccines?

A frightening number of students in the science program were anti-science based policies. It was even worse in the environmental philosophy program, with which I was required to engage for two graduate level classes. They outright believed all science was evil. They believed science was in the clutches of ‘big’ everything. They were woke before there was ‘woke’. They had avoided all science classes, and gave us (the scientists required to engage with philosophy) regular renditions of what exactly science said and did – and they were never right. They stuck by their beliefs even in the face of half the class being scientists who were capable of correcting their mistaken beliefs.

I think at the time I underestimated the numbers of science deniers in the program, because our program tended toward older. Most of the students were Baby Boomers who grew up with diseases and new the benefits of vaccines and other scientific advances. The only one of the older students who had any anti-science beliefs was actually a devout Catholic who believed that abortion was bad for women and society. He wasn’t anti-vax, though.

Kennedy has been awash in the environmental movement for some time. To most people, environmental movement and environmental science are synonymous, so they don’t realize that people like Kennedy have been associated with anti-scientific people who don’t know what the science says, don’t like it anyway, and are determined to bring ‘purity’ back to the Earth.

I don’t know if these groups and individuals shaped his beliefs, or if he helped shape theirs. I suspect more than anything they were all the result of multiple anti-science sources that sound more appealing to them than the rigorous science practiced by the environmental scientists.

Science is hard work. I suspect Kennedy is lazy, at least intellectually. A lot of the students who passed through my classes were intellectually lazy, and felt the science was too hard to understand. It was common practice for them to dismiss the actual science because the articles were filled with graphs and charts and large, unfamiliar words.

There is also the ubiquitous and ill-informed worship of the ‘natural’. Yes, natural can be good. It can be very good. But arsenic is natural. Rattlesnakes are natural. Earthquakes are natural. All of them can kill you. Meanwhile, Pepsi isn’t natural, and while it might kill you if you drank too much of it, a glass of Pepsi is not going to affect you in the same way that a glass of arsenic would.

Vaccines don’t seem ‘natural’. They seem to a lot of people like ‘playing God’. They are ‘chemicals’. (One of the first things I told my students, often the first day of class, is that everything is chemicals. Water is chemicals. Food is chemicals, no matter how ‘natural’. We are chemicals.) Hatred of ‘chemicals’ is also intellectually lazy thinking. There are chemicals that harm us, and chemicals that are essential to maintain our health. Some fall in both categories, depending on dosage or interactions. It can be hard work to sort that out.

11 Responses to “Guest post: They believed science was in the clutches of ‘big’ everything”

Leave a Comment

Subscribe without commenting