Peter J. Hotez - The Deadly Rise Of Anti-Science (Johns Hopkins University Press, 2023) ****

If there is one topic of interest for all of us, is the rise of anti-science. Out of the political frustration and dissatisfaction with their fate, many people have huddled together in a weird movement that rejects reason, science, evidence and even education. They seem tired to be on the wrong side of rationality, hence they accept any theory to feel equal to people who completed higher studies and have acquired some intellectual expertise, whether in medicine, chemistry, biology or engineering. 

Peter J Hotez is clearly a true expert. He is an American scientist, pediatrician, and advocate in the fields of global health, vaccinology, and neglected tropical diseasecontrol. He serves as founding dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine, Professor of Pediatrics and Molecular Virology & Microbiology at Baylor College of Medicine, where he is also Director of the Texas Children's Hospital Center for Vaccine Development and Endowed Chair in Tropical Pediatrics. He also serves as a University Professor of Biology at Baylor University.

He is also very active on X (Twitter) to keep advocating for evidence-based medicine, crusading against anti-scientists on a daily basis, and risking his own life and that of his family in the process. 

In this book he gives an overview of the rise of anti-science in the world, and how it has become its own kind of business, generating huge amounts of money for snake oil salesmen. 

With the appointmentof Robert Kennedy Junior as Health Secretary in the United States, it appears that the battle for reason and evidence has been lost, with all results already showing in terms of the spread of measles, small pox and other infectious diseases in the United States. I only hope people will soon realise why experts and expertise is highly needed. 

I selected some related excerpts from his book, showing the way forward not only for the scientific community but for all of us to ensure that people get the right information and are not the victims of selfish conmen. 

"One of the most challenging aspects of confronting anti-science aggres­sion is that those promoting its agenda have acquired wealth, power, and organization. The anti-vaccine/anti-science ecosystem now in­cludes the most widely viewed nighttime cable news shows, far-right members of the US Congress and extremist groups, and a formidable array of contrarian intellectuals or pseudointellectuals. From my per­sonal experience, I learned firsthand that these groups play hardball. Not only are they aggressive, but as I have tried to make clear, they do not feel compelled to be truthful. They sometimes seek to trigger waves of hate e-mails and attacks via social media. 

Another challenge is the simple reality that anti-science very much runs along a partisan divide. The anti-vaccine and anti-science move­ments are fully enmeshed in extreme conservative or far-right politics. At times, this can include extremist politics, such as when the Proud Boys and other White nationalist groups participate in anti-vaccine ral­lies and messaging. Therefore, combating anti-science means it is often not possible to remain politically neutral." (p. 134)

"In the biomedical sciences, anti-science groups exploit to their advan­tage two key tactics that make it difficult for the scientific community to counter their influence. First, anti-science in America is currently spurred by a strong partisan divide, but the scientific professions re­main committed to political neutrality. Next, health freedom propa­ganda often dismisses mainstream science as little more than science dogma perpetuated by high priests working at elite research universi­ties or institutes. To make matters worse, the anti-science groups dom­inate the modern public square-the Internet and social media-know­ing full well that our profession looks inward, seldom engages the public, and prefers journals and scientific conferences where we speak only to other scientists. 

Therefore, success in combating anti-science aggression requires that we must at some level be prepared to do battle on multiple fronts. It means that at least some biomedical scientists must show a willing­ness to learn and practice science communication in the public market­place." (p. 140)

"However, these actions do not address those generating the content from the far-right, the role of the disinformation dozen in monetizing the Internet, or the Russian government's weaponized health commu­nication. Given the 20 years of relative neglect by the US government in tackling anti-science aggression, I believe we must realize that this issue goes way beyond the health sector. We need input from other branches of the federal government such as the Departments of Homeland Secu­rity, Commerce, Justice-and even State, given the Russian involve­ment. We must seek ways to demonetize the use of the Internet by the disinformation dozen or halt the anti-science aggression emanating from Fox News and elected officials, but in ways that do not violate the Bill of Rights or the US Constitution. Although the health sector may not know what can and should be done to address anti-science aggres­sion, there are those who do and who could come to the table with ex­periences that taught them how to combat global terrorism, cyberat­tacks, and nuclear proliferation. We must learn from them. Along those lines, the White House should consider establishing an interagency task force to examine such possibilities and to make recommendations for action to slow the progression of anti-science." (p. 159)

There is work to be done. We try to participate in this where possible. 

An important book that should be read by everyone in politics.