Most Journalists are Scientifically Unqualified

Why does anyone rely on reporters to interpret scientific articles?

• With few exceptions, corporatized media are unable to comprehend the complexities and ambiguities inherent in scientific discussions, and so repeatedly fall back on the interpretations provided by those who are marketed as fair and accurate arbiters of truth
• When politicization of scientific data and interpretation results in multiple policy decisions which fail to protect the interests of the general public, the public loses faith in both the scientists and the discipline which they purport to practice
• To a large extent, science and scientists are granted an exalted position in western society due to an implied social contract
• Western governments provide them support and society grants elevated social status in exchange for valuable services

Jim Smith, President and Chief Executive Officer, Thompson-Reuters

• Jim began his career as a journalist and rose through the ranks at Thomson Newspapers to become responsible for operations in North America
• He served as global head of Human Resources before becoming Chief Operating Officer of The Thomson Corporation
• Following the acquisition of Reuters in 2008, Jim ran the Professional division of the combined company
• Currently, Jim is a director of Pfizer, Inc. and the Atlantic Council

Nancy Lapids' article covering this technically challenging Nature article is titled "Early Omicron infection unlikely to protect against current variants".

• The findings of the paper, which provides no analysis of either clinical protection or of clinical samples obtained from a control set of patients who have been infected but not vaccinated, are a gross misrepresentation of the findings.

Misinformation

• Misinformation: an unintentional false representation of scientific data and interpretation
• Disinformation: intentional false representation designed to influence thought or policy in some way
• Malinformation: information which may be true or false, but which undermines public faith in the US government

What the actual manuscript describes

• The authors describe detailed characterization of the evolution of the new Omicron variants in relationship to both marketed and newly developed monoclonal antibodies as well as "neutralizing" naturally occurring antibodies obtained from patients who have either been vaccinated with the Chinese inactivated viral vaccine called "Coronavac" or "ZF2001" (an adjuvanted protein subunit vaccine), or were previously infected with an earlier variant of SARS-CoV-2 and then vaccinated with either variant.

Important things to understand in reading the paper

• The preponderance of information demonstrates that optimal acquired protection from infection by SARS-CoV-2 (via natural infection and/or vaccination) is not only provided by antibodies, but also requires a cellular (T-cell) adaptive immune response.

They are assessing and drawing conclusions regarding neutralization evasion of the currently circulating escape mutants regarding antibodies from patients as well as various monoclonal antibody preparations.

• Even in the abstract, the authors are quite precise in their summary of this fact that they are not assessing "protection", clearly demonstrating the inherent bias of the Nancy Lapid/Thompson-Reuters story.

The Problem

• This brief example illustrates the problem with allowing untutored and unqualified reporters who reflect the biases of corporate media (and government) to serve as interpreters and arbiters of scientific truth

Accurate presentation of scientific findings is necessary if the public as well as their elected representatives are to make both sound policy and medically informed personal choice decisions that are grounded in accurate and balanced quantifiable information obtained by best scientific practices

• This is what they are paying for, and they deserve to have it delivered to them.

Transparency

• As is required for all peer reviewed academic manuscripts in the modern era, the sources (and underlying data) should be disclosed in a transparent way, and potential conflicts of interest of those sources should also be disclosed.

 

https://brownstone.org/articles/most-journalists-are-scientifically-unqualified/