• TonyTonyChopper@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    As a chemist scary terms like “forever chemicals” rub me the wrong way. Just speak openly about what the research says.

    The vast majority of research gets zero press coverage, regardless of how relevant it may be to the public. Even within science you’re rolling the dice whether you’ll get any citations 5 years down the line.

    The current media machine is only able to sustain headlines that exaggerate or “overhype” the findings of studies anyway. Let alone the amount of research out there that can’t be reproduced, or has falsified data, or itself is exaggerated in its significance. In my opinion the only time research should make it to the undiscerning public is when a wealth of studies have been done independently, in agreement with one another.

    • verde.viento@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I would offer a different perspective, though it could be that I’m misreading your intention in the last sentence. Scientific findings should all be available to the public, which is the ultimate source of most research funding through taxation or through product pricing. Misunderstanding should be addressed through education, not restricting access to knowledge.

      • TonyTonyChopper@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Right. Open access to the papers themselves is good. But they shouldn’t be pushed into normal news feeds without more careful consideration.