As a microbiologist I think about the vaccination movement a bit. I don't think balance is a scientific expert talking to a non scientist, especially when there are researchers out there whose work is to look at vaccinations skeptically.
But I also think there is space to talk about why the anti-vax movement exists. You cannot deny people their fear, anger and mistrust only question where it comes from. There is room for compassion there but I think it is in human stories.
Balance is someone against vaccines and their story, talking to someone who has benefited from them and their story, someone who has lost through them and their story. Balanced life accounts, not always just facts.
The vaccine movement is faltering, partially because the monsters they protect is from are falling from living memory. 'Don't go into the woods because of the wolf' but no one remembers the wolf, so why can't we go into the woods? Questioning will arise.
I don't think the answer is groups shouting facts back and forth only to receive likes and retweets from those who share their ideas. Have anyone of you argued online with someone and actually connected with them as a person and changed their mind?
Things need to change: News outlets: get a better idea of what balance actually is, have better researchers who understand science, pay them for that understanding and inform rather than sensationalise.
Scientists and doctors: Become better science communicators, you knowing information is no good unless you're able to share that information and connect to non scientists.
Also ask what audience do you want to connect to? Are you only talking to your peers or people who agree with you? Are you only arguing to be heard by those who agree with you or do you really want to change someone's mind?
Now back to drawing stuff and tweets about my kids.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
