|
Spineless Politicians |
| |
| |
Enemies of science
Spin doctors and government agencies are undermining the
quest for knowledge
Alok Jha
Monday November 13, 2006
Guardian
So Tony Blair wants to be a science evangelist? In a recent speech in
Oxford, he outlined his plan to stand up for science and face down those who
distort and undermine it. He singled out animal rights extremists and people
who cause confusion over MMR and GM technology.
But encouraging scientific progress is not just about giving good PR to new
gadgets or cures. Most important is protecting the principle of free
inquiry, something on which he and his government are way behind. His call
for politicians to stand up for science belies the fact that his own
administration systematically attacks this basic principle.
The biggest threat to science doesn't come from a mother scared of what the
MMR jab might do to her child, or the extremist who burns down farms in
solidarity with research animals. It comes from those who claim to respect
the way science creates knowledge, but then misinterpret, distort or ignore
that knowledge.
On the surface, scientists might seem to have little to worry about. Starved
of prestige and money by successive Tory governments, they have seen labs
rebuilt and reputations renewed under Labour. Blair talked of having trouble
with science in his early years until a Damascene conversion left him
"fascinated by scientific process, its reasoning, deduction and
evidence-based analysis; inspired by scientific progress; and excited by
scientific possibility".
But last week the conclusions of the Commons science committee inquiry into
the government's use of scientific advice showed that his good intentions
were not being mirrored by his own advisers. The report said that the
government hid behind a fig leaf of scientific respectability when spinning
controversial policies in a bid to make them more acceptable to voters, and
it called for a "radical re-engineering" of its use of science.
Furthermore, scientists are becoming concerned at the rise of creationism in
the British education system. The geneticist Steve Jones, who has lectured
on evolution at schools for 20 years, says that he now regularly meets
pupils who claim to believe in creationism. The creationist interpretation
of fossil evidence is even encouraged in the new GCSE Gateway to Science
curriculum. In August, a survey of British university students found that a
third believed in either creationism or intelligent design.
At the end of the last parliamentary session, the government agency charged
with licensing drugs took the remarkable decision that it would license
homeopathic remedies. These glorified bottles of water can now carry details
of the ailments they supposedly treat on their labels. The remedies do not
need clinical trial data and peer-reviewed research to make their claims (as
every modern pharmaceutical does). Scientists say the new rules are an
affront to the principle of basing healthcare advice on scientific evidence.
Science is a tough master. Use this method of uncovering truth and you are
not allowed to be selective about your evidence. But innovation, the
technological answers to climate change, and all Blair's "glittering prizes"
will come, at some point in the chain, from the basic rules of free inquiry
grounded in scientific method: think of an idea, test it with experiments,
draw conclusions, refine your experiments, and so on.
A forward-thinking nation loses respect for that free inquiry at its peril.
Children taught to disregard evidence when trying to work out where the
earth came from; a scientific agency deciding to abandon basic principles;
and a government twisting research to fit its ideological message - none of
that respects free inquiry. And if you don't stand up for that, you don't
stand up for science.
· Alok Jha is the Guardian's science correspondent
|
| |
| |
| |
| |
|