Instead of a litany of examples, I would refer you to "bad science journalism" as a search term, and to ask any scientist about how they feel research is repres

Instead of a litany of examples, I would refer you to "bad science journalism" as a search term, and to ask any scientist about how they feel research is represented in media. The results may be shocking. Regarding intent and threading needles, I spent the pandemic working in a public health system, after over a decade in health information privacy policy and systems, so I lack this comment's uncertainty about malice. Anyone who worked in health and thought or even said anti-vaxxers were hateful and better off dead was not providing honest service. In healthcare and in particular public health, I'd argue that's not a mere opinion, it's something much darker and more culpable. G-word level questions arise. If we are dealing in truth, we are dealing in logic, and the last best empirical result is not exempt from that standard unless we actively dispense with it. Science is practiced, it is not litigated, or worse: advocated.