It may be said that the world is divided into science believers and science sceptics who sometimes come to blows on topics that vary from global warming to vaccinating a newborn child. Controversial issues are not only plentiful but, with advancing science, are likely to become more challenging.
Friction between scientific ideas and ethical standards are not unknown today as they have been practically through any moment in history, starting with the worries of Galileo several centuries ago down to the most recent concerns about genetic engineering of embryonic DNA.
Take vaccination for example. Science emphasises that not only is it necessary to vaccinate our children against the common killing diseases, but that public health principles demand that the public is covered against them to ensure ‘herd immunity’. And yet we find that the acceptance of this doctrine varies enormously, with the vaccination rate in Malta being over 90 per cent, whereas in places like Australia it stands at around 80 per cent – well below the level necessary to produce protection within the community.
This considerably increases the risk of epidemics within the community, as has happened recently in the UK and other places. Other issues that have proved to be bones of contention between scientists and sceptics include climate change, genetically modified crops, embryo research, as well as, in places like the US, controversy about evolution and other issues relating to the literal interpretation of biblical stories, which is so rampant in the US for instance.
Other challenges have arisen from new approaches to medical practice – including the flourishing of alternative medicine – which are often based on doubtful or non-existent science. These have challenged well-established scientific principles and attracted converts who may claim a Wikipedia-based knowledge.
The need for encouraging scientific education in schools has long been recognised, and yet, science is still considered a difficult and even boring subject
One might blame these controversies on a lack of a basic scientific education, which ignores method and concentrates rather on details. Science teaching often involves familiarity with some scientific facts of theoretical or practical significance, which is fine as far as it goes. What must be appreciated, however, is that science demands proof, derived by well-established and testable methods.
In medicine, for instance, no drug is acceptable unless it goes through a thorough process of investigation, the gold standard being what is called a ‘double blind controlled trial’, where a new drug is tested for serious complications, efficacy and therapeutic effect in comparison with control, with a special effort to control psychological (placebo) effects in both patient and administrator. It is so much easier for the average person to accept the word of a friend or guru rather than undertake a serious investigation of a particular fad or theory.
It is also a fact that most objections to science come not from those who have never had the advantage of an education. Lack of interest in vaccination does not come from the uneducated people in Africa who would gladly accept the advantages of these products if they were made available to them.
Sceptics seem to arise more frequently in the western world where general education is not lacking, in those who believe that they have a right to object without being scientifically qualified to do so.
This may be related to access to easy knowledge. It is very easy for anyone who can read and is minimally computer literate to check on current knowledge from that cornucopia of information provided by the internet. It is, however, very easy to be biased and selective in one’s searches for knowledge if one does not have the necessary background to assess the value of such knowledge. One example will suffice. If one is worried about, say, the complications of a certain drug or procedure, one could easily find this out by looking under a term like ‘complications’, and a long list of complications can be found.
This can frighten any reasonable person, but does not give a balance of risks of taking the particular drug against not taking it. Complications are not unknown with most medications or medical procedures but these have to be balanced against the far greater risk of not taking them. The same holds for vaccinations, and, indeed, with most scientific advances.
The need for encouraging scientific education in schools has long been recognised, and yet, science is still considered a difficult and even boring subject, which reflects more on the teachers than on the subject itself.
These days the need for the study of STEM subjects (science, technology, engineering, mathematics) is recognised worldwide. Added to these should be an appreciation of how science should be evaluated and how one can think scientifically to exclude myths and fads.