Science in Action

Right now, to see a good example of science in action you need to look no further than the nightly news.  The world-wide impact of the COVID-19 pandemic has placed scientific investigation in the public sphere on a major scale.  The general public’s reaction to this is interesting to watch.  From a scientist’s point of view, some of these reactions are concerning, but also understandable, given the way that science seems to be removed from the “everyday” experience of the general population.

A scientist understands how the scientific method works.  A process is observed and described, followed by the consideration of what might have caused or contributed to the observed outcome. This leads to one or more hypotheses which may explain what was observed.  Hypotheses are checked and validated by experimentation, with the outcomes of these experiments then subjected to the same process.  Eventually, the scientist arrives at a small number of hypotheses, or even a single one.  Discussion with colleagues may lead to more investigation, which leads to more hypotheses . . . and the process continues.  A scientist is very unlikely to talk about a “correct answer” to any particular question.  The “answer” (or answers) that a scientist presents are the hypotheses that are consistent with all of the observations made, and which haven’t yet been disproved.

Science, by its nature, involves a changing understanding of the intricacies of a process.  Processes that we have been studying for years are less likely to have large variations in understandings or explanations, simply because so much work has already been done to disprove proposed hypotheses.  New processes, however, are extremely likely to lead to updated or changing understandings, because there is much to learn at the beginning of any investigation.

In general, this initial phase of research, with its changing understandings and theories, is done out of the public eye.  A laboratory researching the value of a new drug may spend months or years investigating its applicability to treat a certain illness before it ever comes to public awareness.  A manufacturer may have worked through a dozen different iterations of a new piece of equipment before the final model is released for use.  Medical researchers investigating the potential methods of transmission of a virus that only affects animals will not be reporting on their new findings every single week – they will be able to review data, repeat tests, complete their studies and then release their preliminary findings.

Those studying COVID-19 right now do not have the luxury of time.  Their work is evolving in real time, in front of our eyes.  In order to limit transmission and infection, our communities and governments have to adapt quickly to the most recent scientific information.  And while we are lucky that we have an almost instantaneous communication system nowadays, there are also a large number of people who believe that the constantly changing nature of COVID-19 information and advice means that the information is not reliable and that it should not be trusted.

It is not unexpected that there are significant changes in the information being provided to the public at this moment.  There are multiple teams of researchers in many locations all over the world doing a large amount of work.  Test results coming out of one research group may be different from several other groups for a number of reasons.  It may be due to a slightly different strain of the coronavirus in the area.  There may be differences in the type of instrumentation used, which may provide slightly different types of results.  One group may be studying the impacts on people over 80, while another is focusing on transmissions between children.  Multiple findings do not mean that some or all findings are all incorrect.  Importantly, it also doesn’t mean that any of them (or even just one of them) is completely correct.  This is a rapidly evolving situation with a novel virus on a world-wide scale.  The fact that the information and the data is changing and being updated regularly should be a good thing.  It means that our scientific and medical community are learning more about this virus constantly and are swiftly updating the advice being given to the public.

Note also that it is perfectly reasonable that differing advice is being given to different populations.  In a location where community transmission is limited, masks may not required, because the use of masks is unlikely to significantly impact a person’s likelihood of contracting the virus.  In a location where community transmission is an issue, correctly wearing an appropriate type of mask will have an impact on the spread of the virus and may therefore be mandated or required by the local authorities.

Science faces a unique dilemma right now.  Science requires people to question things, to ask “why?” and to then carry out research to support or disprove hypotheses.  At the moment, however, science itself is being questioned, and the most common question seems to be, “Why should I believe this?” Because so many of the predictions about the coronavirus pandemic are unpleasant (the length of time people may not be able to travel, the lack of physical contact between families and friends, the potentially catastrophic numbers of casualties from the illness, the terrible impact it is having on people’s financial security and mental health), there are people who don’t want to believe what they are hearing from doctors and scientists with regards to this virus.  In some locations, this inclination towards not believing in science is further exacerbated by government officials who disregard or openly disagree with the findings of their own doctors and scientists, even when there is no valid scientific reason. 

This virus will not go away without effort.  It requires medical and scientific professionals all over the world to work to find successful vaccines or treatments.  It requires an unprecedented level of co-operation between countries to ensure that the knowledge gained is shared with all, because this is a world-wide issue.  Eliminating or at least controlling the virus will only happen if a sufficient number of people in each community listen to the medical advice and follow the directions that they are given. 

There is no miracle to cure this pandemic, but we don’t need a miracle.  We have science.  It is going to take time, and there will be changing advice, but science will help us control or eliminate this virus.     

Previous
Previous

The Hierarchy of Controls

Next
Next

The Importance of Documentation