Where to get your science information: a guide

The amount of information, and more worrying, misinformation, available to the public today is both unprecedented and astounding. It can also be incredibly confusing to try to process so much conflicting information from so many different sources. Understanding what sources are reliable and what sources are spreading information without either doing their due diligence, or without basing their information on anything more than their uninformed opinion is particularly important for safeguarding your own health and the well being of your loved ones.

So today I am going to try not to preach (too much anyway), but rather, to share what in my opinion (as a woman of science) are reliable sources and what sources should be taken with a mole of NaCl.

First on my list are reputable scientific journals (as in not Soviet style government mouthpieces paying lip service to science, and not weirdo/conspiracy theorist journals run by old hippies living off the grid in their aluminum foil covered van). I understand that most people can’t fully understand these articles but sometimes the abstract is comprehensible enough to the layman to get an idea of what the article’s about. If it still sounds like mumbo jumbo to you, the next best thing is a scientific review of the topic written for non-scientists (citations of scientific articles are a pretty good indication that the author of the review at least did some research on the subject and wasn’t just talking out of his anus).

Number three on my list is Dr. Anthony Fauci. According to his biography on the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases website, he was the 13th most cited scientist between the years 1983 and 2002. Unless you were the 12th most cited scientist during that period, your opinion on science is probably not as credible as Dr. Fauci’s. If you would like to know more about his qualifications, feel free to look him up. But in short, he has many. And while no one person can be right about everything, Dr. Fauci has been pretty on the money about what’s going on and what we should be doing.

Moving on to the next category of sources- the potentially reliable, but also potentially completely misguided sources. Number one is doctors. While many of these fine fellows know a thing or two about science, that is not a given. The best thing doctors can do is to advise their patients according to the latest scientific and medical research, or at least according to the latest CDC guidelines. Unfortunately, many purported doctors/healthcare professional (who have even less scientific understanding than doctors) have taken it upon themselves to advise the general public on matters that they have not sufficiently studied and don’t actually know very much about.

Another resource is credible newspapers (widely circulated, reputable papers- again, not weirdo/conspiracy theorist papers run by old hippies living off the grid in their aluminum foil covered van) covering new scientific breakthroughs and newly published research. You still have to make sure that the research was published in a credible scientific journal. Remember, newspapers are out to sell copies, not to objectively inform the public of what’s going on in the world out of ideological motives. And crack-pot claims by alleged “scientists” that scare the pants off the public sell newspapers, even if the ideas are later retracted.

And now on to where you should definitely not get your information from, on a scale of 1 to absolutely not. Number 1 is politicians. You can reasonably assume that anything they say is politically motivated as that is kind of the job description of “politician.” I shall not besmirch politicians’ reputations any more than that, but I think I can safely say that politicians are by and large not elected due to their logical reasoning, let alone scientific knowledge. They have an agenda guided by what they think will get them elected whether or not it is beneficial to the general public or even reasonable.

Number 2 is random guys on YouTube. Guys/women on YouTube can pretty much say whatever they want without being censored and probably have not done any coherent research on the subject, because otherwise, why would they be on YouTube? I too could upload a video with an absurd claim such as hats are actually a government plot to monitor our thoughts and that we should all just let our heads freeze in the winter and I would probably also get some followers whose heads are way past the need for hats.

Number 3 on this list is your buddy Joe’s Facebook post, for similar reasons as in number 2. Joe may be a really nice guy, but unless he is the 11th most cited scientist from 1983 to 2002, his opinion is probably worth about as much as the bucket of dirt my roommate once left in our bathroom.

Last but not least on my list of completely unreliable sources- your feelings. Going with your feelings/intuition when trying a new recipe is fine (assuming you’re an above average cook), but it’s not a particularly great idea when it comes to making medical decisions. And while I still wouldn’t recommend it, going with your feelings when it comes to your own health is at least acceptable. It is less acceptable however, when others’ lives, whether it be friends and family or the population at large, are at stake.

Many people make decisions based on fear, not based on careful analysis of the pros and cons. There are times when fear can lead to bad judgment. Realizing that your reactions and feelings on a certain matter are driven by fear is important. You can then put these feelings aside, and make more informed and knowledgeable decisions, based on facts and information.