She Blinded Me With Science?

She blinded me with science? Or did she? Not really. Though she did render me short, or partially, sighted with science. She being Fiona Fox, a founding member of the Science Media Centre.

Fiona was with Skeptics in the Pub - Online (last night hosted by Gerard Sorko in Cologne) for a talk based on, and named after, her book Beyond the Hype:The Inside Story of Science's Biggest Media Controversies. It was, truth be told, a little dryer than that title suggests.

Beset by a few tech gremlins (not the first time the Twitch glitch has struck at one of these events), Fiona told us about the history of the Science Media Centre and some examples of the good (or you may think not so good) work they do. Lots of prominent scientists had their names dropped but for the most part they meant nothing to me.

Which, on its own, shows that the founding of the Science Media Centre was a good thing and, also, that they still have work to do. The new book, which Fiona briefly read from (a section about the Labour government's sacking of 'drugs czar' Professor David Nutt for suggesting taking ecstasy was no more dangerous than riding a horse), was written in 2019 but had has a couple of addendums to cover recent events.

 

It tells the story of the Science Media Centre which was set up, as an independent body, in 2002 and some of the big cases they've been involved with. Back in the late nineties/early noughties, there were lots of news stories floating around that were causing the public to lose their trust in scientists - and even science.

Fiona cited the case of the disgraced former physician, and now anti-vaxxer, Andrew Wakefield who falsely claimed that the MMR jab caused autism as well as stories about Monsanto and GM foods. She also brought up the BSE scare which to my, probably ailing, recall seems to come from further back.

No matter. The point being that every time a new science interest story broke it came attached with heated rows that alienated much of the public. Activist groups like Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth would have an opinion and make it public and multinationals with vested interests, like Monsanto, would do so too. But the scientific voices were barely audible in the public debate.

Back at the foundation of the Science Media Centre (SMC from now on in), social media barely existed so they focused on the news media (or what some now disparagingly call the 'mainstream media') and they pioneered a more proactive approach from scientists. The idea wasn't to take either side in debates but to provide to the best information available to the public and to use maximum openness in doing so.

The first example Fiona spoke about was that of stem cell research/therapeutic cloning. Stem cell research is useful in helping scientists understand awful diseases like Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, and Motor Neurone but there was a shortage of eggs available to do the research and some felt the eggs of animals could be the solution.

It was happening in China (and, as we all know, interactions between animals and humans in China have never caused any major problems!!) but people here were being fed stories about "designer babies" and "Frankenstein's monster". Fox and her team called a press conference and, in her own words, won a lot of people over.

A vaguely contentious claim but probably a true one (she didn't seem like a liar). More difficult for me was when she went on to talk about 'animal research'. It's tough for me because I've been a veggie for nearly forty years, I used to buy Crass records that had huge and powerful anti-vivisection messages in them, and because my ex-girlfriend worked for the BUAV (the British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection).

Fox spoke about violent protests at Cambridge University preventing the building of a new animal research laboratory. I remember that too, vaguely, but from a whole different perspective. 

She also spoke about how the Wellcome Trust, a place she attended for a talk on animal research', told her not to use the word animal, the 'a' word, because it brought the wrong sort of attention. Fox and others cajoled some of the animal lab people to at least speak publicly about what they are doing and why.

She wasn't saying, and didn't say last night, that animal research was or wasn't ethical. Just that those involved should be open and have their side heard. Not just hide away. I actually agree with that though it's probably easier said than done.

It seems to me that the SMC are, on the whole, on the side of good and even if I have trouble with the fews of vivisectionists I do at least realise it's a complicated and complex world and shutting people down, or shutting ourselves down, won't make it any better.

A Q&A touched on e-cigarettes, ebola, Twitter, the polarised society - polarised by Twitter, and, of course, Covid. It wasn't the most interesting Skeptics talk I've ever attended but, like all of them, I learned something about the world and then, by writing this blog, learned a little about myself.