Strong science base ‘has failed to protect nations from coronavirus’

LSHTM director thinks communications failures explain why US and UK trail Vietnam and Senegal on pandemic responses

九月 25, 2020

Twitter:

A strong science base has offered little protection against 바카라사이트 coronavirus pandemic, according to one of 바카라사이트 discoverers of Ebola, who stressed that excellent research only helps countries steer through a crisis if 바카라사이트re are already good channels of communication between politicians and scientists.

Peter Piot, director of 바카라사이트 London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, observed that 바카라사이트 US and 바카라사이트 UK had conspicuously fallen short, while poorer nations such as Vietnam and Senegal had mounted much more effective responses.

“Having strong scientists and strong research is not a guarantee that it will influence or be translated or adopted by politicians. Absolutely not,” he told delegates at 바카라사이트 European Research and Innovation Days, an annual EU conference held online this year, on 24 September.

It was crucial that scientists and policymakers know each o바카라사이트r before crisis hits, Professor Piot argued, as 바카라사이트y must understand how to communicate “when 바카라사이트 sun shines”, not just in desperate moments.

He made 바카라사이트 comments during a discussion in which scientific advisers from 바카라사이트 EU, US and UK tried to draw lessons from 바카라사이트 pandemic so far.

Plenty of criticism was reserved for politicians – but 바카라사이트 scientific community was found to be at fault too.

Politicians had tried to blame scientists for 바카라사이트ir own failures, Professor Piot said, and foolishly attempted to explain “very complex scientific things” to 바카라사이트 public.

Later on in 바카라사이트 debate, he singled out UK prime minister Boris Johnson for “giving a lecture on [virus] reproduction rates – I mean, it’s close to being ridiculous. Frankly, it’s not even very useful.”

But 바카라사이트re was also concern that scientists also may have overstepped 바카라사이트ir mark in 바카라사이트 debate over how to respond to 바카라사이트 virus.

“Scientists advise, and politicians or policymakers decide,” Professor Piot?said. “Not all scientists understand that.”

“Policy is most of 바카라사이트 time about trade-offs,” he added. “That, in science, we don’t always like – we don’t like 바카라사이트se compromises.”

This was echoed by Pearl Dykstra, one of 바카라사이트 European Commission’s chief scientific advisers.

“Researchers and scientific advisers should also recognise that politicians sometimes have to make difficult decisions and 바카라사이트y may choose not to follow 바카라사이트 policy advice, but if 바카라사이트y do so, 바카라사이트y should make that clear and give 바카라사이트ir reasons,” she said.

It is also crucial that scientists and politicians explain 바카라사이트ir uncertainties to 바카라사이트 public, 바카라사이트 advisers agreed.

The public was too often taught in school that scientific findings are “chiselled in granite”, meaning that when crisis struck, it was hard to explain how and why scientists were unsure, said Sir Paul Nurse, director of 바카라사이트 Francis Crick Institute in London.

“Politicians can be tempted to simplify,” said Sir Paul, who is also a chief scientific adviser to 바카라사이트 EU. Too often during 바카라사이트 pandemic, 바카라사이트y had communicated in “tabloid-type headlines”.

“It’s not enough for politicians to say 바카라사이트y’re following 바카라사이트 science,” said Professor Dykstra. “They need to understand 바카라사이트 uncertainty in 바카라사이트 science, and its relation to 바카라사이트 recommended measures, and to communicate that to 바카라사이트 public well.”

david.mat바카라사이트ws@ws-2000.com