Two recent events relevant to scientific authority: the past recommendation of a nutritional pyramid that contributed to a generation of obesity and the anti-va

Two recent events relevant to scientific authority: the past recommendation of a nutritional pyramid that contributed to a generation of obesity and the anti-vaxxer movement that has resulted in a measles outbreak. Neither of these are black and white scenarios. Perhaps the nutritional pyramid had some positive effects. And perhaps not getting vaccinated has resulted in the savings of thousands of lives. Scientific authority rests not on being right, but on reasoned disclosure of evidence. We have "scientific studies" being paid for by companies with a vested interest in the results. (Disclosure, I am writing this on an iMac with my iPhone sitting next to me). Today you can read how the Apple iWatch will detect AFIB. It is a study paid for by Apple, published by Stanford Medicine. From med.stanford.edu "The results of the Apple Heart Study highlight the potential role that innovative digital technology can play in creating more predictive and preventive health care". And who can argue with the truth of that? But certainly the study is presented with the expectation of encouraging people to buy Apple products. Neither the Apple site nor the Stanford site make it clear that false positives for AFIB can result in unnecessary medical procedures along with their financial costs and health risks. I'm not singling out of Apple or Stanford - I have great respect for both of them - but I have less trust in them than I did yesterday. There are far worse instances: https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/09/13/493739074/50-years-ago-sugar-industry-quietly-paid-scientists-to-point-blame-at-fat https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/09/13/493739074.... Bringing back scientific authority requires earning trust.