4 ms·

> However I think he misrepresent some anti-vaxxers: it's not a matter of trusting science, it's a matter of trusting scientists with heavy conflict of interest

> However I think he misrepresent some anti-vaxxers: it's not a matter of trusting science, it's a matter of trusting scientists with heavy conflict of interest to tell the truth while most of us don't have the required scientific knowledge to evaluate if they're telling the truth. But you don't have to trust only scientists directly or indirectly employed by those companies. There are plenty of subject-matter experts who work for competitors or are tenured in academia who would have very little to lose from criticising the rollout.

jmnicolas 5y ago
> who would have very little to lose from criticising the rollout I beg to differ, here is an example: Luc Montagnier, a Nobel prize recipient, has been completely marginalized after emitting doubts about vaccine safety and is now absolutely inaudible in anything mainstream. It's just an example, there are several more. Anybody that saw how he was treated probably though really hard before emitting any dissenting opinion in public. It feels like the Inquisition.
- phreeza 5y ago
  Hm the main content of a scientists life in my experience is really not measured by mainstream media appearances. And if anything, he is probably more known now than before [0], so even in the sense of crude 'celebrity status', he saw a net gain. [0] https://trends.google.de/trends/explore?date=all&q=Luc%20Montagnier https://trends.google.de/trends/explore?date=all&q=Luc%20Mon...
native_samples 5y ago
Ah yes, academia, that famous bastion of free thought where success is totally unconnected to whether your colleagues like you and nobody ever gets cancelled. One where, as the fine article points out, 95% of biology professors vote Democrat. Academia is the last segment of society I trust on these topics.
- NikolaeVarius 5y ago
  Well, reality is well known to have a liberal bias.
- phreeza 5y ago
  What about those working for competitor companies then?
  - native_samples 5y ago
    For better or worse, companies generally don't directly criticize their competitors products and especially won't make claims they're unsafe. That said, it's conceivable that with reforms to tort law, this could be incentivized in a reasonable way.
    - phreeza 5y ago
      Call me a sheep, but if your distrust of other people runs so deep that you can't trust any source of scientific knowledge, from within or without academia, I feel a great sadness for you. Some scepticism is always needed but this seems like throwing out the baby with the bathwater.
      - native_samples 5y ago
        I'm a discerning sceptic. I trust science that has been proven through successful application. I feel sorry for people who have to read academic papers as part of their job in order to find science that they could apply, partly because that used to be a part of my job and after the novelty wore off it was a miserable task. Science is best paired with real world engineering - academia can do this but the least trustworthy fields e.g. those that rely entirely on modelling, never do.
        phreeza 5y ago
        The fraction of science that can ever be applied to engineering is vanishingly small though. How will you ever get to that kind of standard for things like astrophysics, particle physics, mathematics, most of biology? Do you really think the big bang, evolution, Fermat's theorem etc are bogus because they haven't been proven by "real world engineering"? I completely agree that there is a lot of bogus stuff coming out, like the perennial "hyper efficient solar cell developed in a lab" press release that bubbles up on HN every now and then. But that is just a tiny piece of science if you ask me. Also blaming 'cancel culture' for this seems lazy , there are misaligned incentives but they are more subtle.

jmnicolas 5y ago

> who would have very little to lose from criticising the rollout I beg to differ, here is an example: Luc Montagnier, a Nobel prize recipient, has been completely marginalized after emitting doubts about vaccine safety and is now absolutely inaudible in anything mainstream. It's just an example, there are several more. Anybody that saw how he was treated probably though really hard before emitting any dissenting opinion in public. It feels like the Inquisition.

phreeza 5y ago
Hm the main content of a scientists life in my experience is really not measured by mainstream media appearances. And if anything, he is probably more known now than before [0], so even in the sense of crude 'celebrity status', he saw a net gain. [0] https://trends.google.de/trends/explore?date=all&q=Luc%20Montagnier https://trends.google.de/trends/explore?date=all&q=Luc%20Mon...

native_samples 5y ago

Ah yes, academia, that famous bastion of free thought where success is totally unconnected to whether your colleagues like you and nobody ever gets cancelled. One where, as the fine article points out, 95% of biology professors vote Democrat. Academia is the last segment of society I trust on these topics.

NikolaeVarius 5y ago
Well, reality is well known to have a liberal bias.
phreeza 5y ago
What about those working for competitor companies then?
- native_samples 5y ago
  For better or worse, companies generally don't directly criticize their competitors products and especially won't make claims they're unsafe. That said, it's conceivable that with reforms to tort law, this could be incentivized in a reasonable way.
  - phreeza 5y ago
    Call me a sheep, but if your distrust of other people runs so deep that you can't trust any source of scientific knowledge, from within or without academia, I feel a great sadness for you. Some scepticism is always needed but this seems like throwing out the baby with the bathwater.
    - native_samples 5y ago
      I'm a discerning sceptic. I trust science that has been proven through successful application. I feel sorry for people who have to read academic papers as part of their job in order to find science that they could apply, partly because that used to be a part of my job and after the novelty wore off it was a miserable task. Science is best paired with real world engineering - academia can do this but the least trustworthy fields e.g. those that rely entirely on modelling, never do.
      - phreeza 5y ago
        The fraction of science that can ever be applied to engineering is vanishingly small though. How will you ever get to that kind of standard for things like astrophysics, particle physics, mathematics, most of biology? Do you really think the big bang, evolution, Fermat's theorem etc are bogus because they haven't been proven by "real world engineering"? I completely agree that there is a lot of bogus stuff coming out, like the perennial "hyper efficient solar cell developed in a lab" press release that bubbles up on HN every now and then. But that is just a tiny piece of science if you ask me. Also blaming 'cancel culture' for this seems lazy , there are misaligned incentives but they are more subtle.