Often, people contest the ideas put forth by science- and not entirely without historical merit. Once upon a time, we thought bad air caused respiratory sickness (thus, the source for Influenza- Spanish for 'influence'), we thought XMRV (Xenotropic Murine leukemia virus Related Virus) caused chronic fatigue syndrome, and we classified Homosexuality as a psychological disorder. Dissenters and critics claim that their criticism is harmless if they are incorrect, though this is contingent on the notion that mainstream science is already operating on what it believes is right. The motives are different- some people feel that some lines ought not to be crossed, while others whisper of conspiracy and profit gouging. The simple truth of science denialism, though, is that it isn't harmless.
HIV denialism, for example, is the notion that HIV is either not the causal agent for AIDS, or that HIV does not exist outright. From what I can tell, this movement seems to be the mutant husk of an honest scientific debate from the late 1980's to the early 1990's, where some scientists were not wholly convinced by the evidence presented at the time that HIV was the causal agent for AIDS. A similar skepticism- a healthy skepticism that was backed up by peer reviewed studies and not conjecture- successfully disproved XMRV as the causal agent for chronic fatigue syndrome, however, with HIV, the evidence is overwhelming. Not only does HIV fulfill Koch's Postulates to be the causal pathogen[1] (an epidemiological correlation, the ability to isolate the pathogen from a host and propagate said pathogen outside the host, and transmission from an infected organism to an uninfected susceptible organism produces the disease), but we have very strong, well-defined correlations between the use of Highly Active AntiRetroviral Therapy (HAART) and extended life expectancies of HIV infected individuals.[2] Antiviral drugs often target specific sites in specific viruses, and aren't broadly neutralizing in the same manner as antibiotics.
Yet, whispers of conspiracy, profit-gouging, and medical hubris echo across the internet, riding on the waves of an honest skepticism in science from years past. HIV denialists make wild claims, including the notions that vitamins may outright cure HIV where drugs would not[3], that the very antivirals intended to help reduce viral loads (AZT, namely) cause the disease. One may ask what the harm is, and who might believe such claims and act on them. I've heard various anecdotes of lives needlessly cut short because someone took what they read on the internet at face value, but the most egregious case happened in South Africa. In the year 2000, the president of South Africa invited several AIDS denialists to a closed government conference on AIDS. Shortly afterwards, the government and some of its ministers adopted denialist views and policies, causing a campaign of misinformation to the people of South Africa, and a refusal of the government to accept free antivirals. After legal suit and significant outcry from the non-industry scientific community, the South African government eventually reversed its position, but the damage had already been done. The loss of life resulting from the government's denialist policies is presently estimated at 330,000 people- or just under the entire population of Wyoming, or 180 people a day for five years. [4]
Denialism of the safety and efficacy of vaccinations has led to the resurgence of preventable diseases once eradicated from countries- such as Measles in the US and the UK. See my post on Vaccines for more information. Denialism of climate change- and the climate is changing, the only debate is whether we're influencing it or not- continues to bog down efforts to modulate weather trends back towards more favorable conditions. Denialism and fear of the safety of nuclear energy applications keeps electricity prices high, and prevents us from extending the shelf life of ripe fruits and vegetables by the closure of irradiation plants. The thing about science is that it isn't a belief system- it's a collection of observations from which conclusions are drawn. The existence of the sun and its radiation of light is not contingent on your faith in it, but basic science demonstrates that we have regular cycles of day and night thanks to the earth's rotation through observation. Ignoring facts does not cause them to cease to be, and denialism of science without sound evidence or reason to back up that denialism can be, and is harmful.
If you like this post, please share it with your friends. As always, I encourage you to do your own research, draw your own conclusions from the facts presented here. Please, increase your knowledge, and share it with those around you. Feel free to leave questions, comments, and concerns here on the blog. I'd love to hear your feedback. Until next time, stay spooked.
[4]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19186354
[3]http://www.theguardian.com/world/2005/may/14/southafrica.internationalaidanddevelopment
[2]http://cid.oxfordjournals.org/content/53/10/1024.full
[1]http://www.niaid.nih.gov/topics/HIVAIDS/Understanding/howHIVCausesAIDS/Pages/HIVcausesAIDS.aspx
No comments:
Post a Comment