The tricks propagandists use to beat science

Not quite ME/CFS related but...


A model of the way opinions spread reveals how propagandists use the scientific process against itself to secretly influence policy makers...
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/610012/the-tricks-propagandists-use-to-beat-science/

 

I find that manufacturing doubt, controversy and confusion is a good description of what the BPS crowd have done and continue to do.

The result is precisely that health authorities don't know what to do because there is no consensus.

Insight into who exactly has given them money over the years for their work could be revealing (spoiler: probably the health insurance industry).

 

Now you know why i posted this

 

in 1952, the popular magazine Reader’s Digest published “Cancer by the Carton,” an article about the increasing body of evidence that proved it. The article caused widespread shock and media coverage. Today the health dangers of smoking are clear and unambiguous.

And yet smoking bans have been slow to come into force, most having appeared some 40 years or more after the Reader’s Digest article.

I'm writing this from a UK perspective.

I wonder how much of the slowness to ban was because governments benefited immensely from tobacco being a wonderful target for taxation. I have frequently read that taxation on tobacco in the UK generated enough money to pay for the NHS with a lot of money to spare. (I don't know if that is still true but it was until relatively recently.) Also, smokers dying younger than they would have done as non-smokers probably reduced the pension bill by quite a bit. Smoking for 30 - 40 years would have been quite common. So people who smoked were probably able to work for several decades while contributing a lot of tax to the exchequer, and then they conveniently died as they approached retirement age or soon after.

 

Sorry, my previous post was not really on-topic.

 

Some more history regarding tobacco in this context: https://jcoynester.wordpress.com/20...-shoved-a-hans-eysenck-scandal-under-the-rug/

I think it is interesting that we collectively have not found a way to reliably beat this kind of stuff into the ground as soon as it occurs and the same stuff that worked half a century ago still works for decades due to issues that mostly everyone knows about (e.g. peer review not working to shut down this kind of crap, people with huge CoIs influencing policies and so on).

 

I think this is happening right now with Electromagnetic Fields and many other topics.

 

Viewed using the Propanganda Model of Chomsky and Herman, history shows how biased science is used as one of the filters to unofficially shape the official versions of 'news' and 'reality'.

It explains the existence of the Science Media Center who do a similar job as the tobbacco lobbyists used to.

 

This is interesting but there is much more then just this. One could write a book just covering propaganda techniques, and perhaps the biggest problem today is the "left" thinks truth and justice and meekness will win the day, yet another book worthy topic.

 

'Fun' facts:

The 'father' of modern propaganda Edward Bernays, was behind the push to make smoking acceptable for women in the US.

He was the nephew of Sigmund Freud. What a family.

 

No worries, its good to explore a topic from many angles

Gives credence to apple not falling far from tree