Scientists Rally Against Antiscience Movement in New Book

The ongoing conflict surrounding science has intensified, as highlighted in the new book, Science Under Siege, by climate scientist Michael Mann and vaccine developer Peter Hotez. Both authors illustrate their experiences as targets of harassment and misinformation campaigns while advocating for their respective fields. They argue that the recent surge in antiscience sentiment poses a significant threat to public health and environmental stability.

As the 21st century progresses, summers in the global north are increasingly marked by extreme weather events, including flash floods, droughts, and intensifying storms. This reality aligns with predictions made by scientists from Exxon in the 1970s. Amid this climate crisis, the United States Secretary of Health and Human Services has discouraged the use of critical tools necessary to combat infectious diseases, further complicating the public health landscape.

Mann, known for his development of the controversial hockey stick graph in 1998, which illustrated the alarming rise in global temperatures, and Hotez, who created a low-cost COVID-19 vaccine using public funding, did not foresee themselves becoming advocates for science. Their roles as “unlikely crusaders” emerged from a necessity to defend their disciplines against growing misinformation.

Convergence of Climate and Health Issues

The convergence of climate change and public health issues is a central theme in the authors’ arguments. They explain how climate change is altering the habitats and behaviors of wildlife that carry diseases, increasing the risk of zoonotic transmissions to humans. This growing proximity to disease-carrying species, they assert, compounds the threats posed by both climate change and infectious diseases.

Mann and Hotez contend that a more insidious force is at work: a concerted attack on science led by the current Republican Party. They identify five primary groups contributing to this antiscience agenda:

1. Plutocrats and their political action committees
2. Petrostate politicians and polluters
3. Misleading professionals, including some physicians and academics
4. Propagandists, particularly those utilizing podcasts
5. Certain media outlets

According to the authors, these groups collaborate to create and spread misinformation, undermining public trust in scientific findings.

In their analysis, Mann and Hotez note that antiscience propaganda is not a novel phenomenon; it has historical roots in authoritarian regimes. For instance, during the Soviet era, Joseph Stalin targeted scientists to suppress dissenting views and stabilize his regime, leading to dire consequences for public welfare. The authors argue that discrediting science is a tactic used to weaken societal structures that rely on knowledge and truth.

Call to Action Against Misinformation

The authors trace the trajectory of antiscience messaging surrounding COVID-19, which mirrored the patterns observed in climate change discussions but unfolded in a matter of months. Initially, the seriousness of the pandemic was downplayed, evolving into narratives that discouraged collective action due to economic concerns. This culminated in an environment where scientists were scapegoated for societal issues, further complicating efforts to address both the pandemic and climate change.

Mann and Hotez emphasize that such misinformation not only misleads the public but also fosters division, hindering collective action necessary to tackle complex global challenges. They argue that overcoming these “dark forces of antiscience” is crucial for the future of humanity and the health of the planet.

The authors’ motivations stem from a desire to hold those in power accountable. They suggest that the actions of plutocrats and polluters reveal a primary goal: to maintain their influence by obstructing regulatory measures that would protect public health and the environment.

In their conclusion, Mann and Hotez urge the public to take political action as a means of reversing the current trajectory. They advocate for increased voter turnout to support politicians prioritizing the well-being of citizens over corporate interests. They express concern that without systemic changes, the future of both science and society remains bleak.

The release of Science Under Siege serves as both a warning and a rallying cry for those committed to defending scientific integrity. The authors hope that their insights will galvanize action against the pervasive antiscience movement, ensuring that future generations can rely on the scientific method as a tool for understanding and improving the world.