How to scientifically answer questions like
wear a mask or not? Anyone and everyone can think scientifically. It is thinking
systematically and critically about the information and considering the ethics
of your choice given that information. It is also being open to new information
which can change your mind. The key is knowing that public science is a process
of independently assessing information gleaned from reliable sources. The hard
part is being open to that information even if it goes against our own biases
or preferences. Lastly thinking ethically about your choices. Could what you
do adversely affect someone else?
What Is Science For Joe Everyman?
The first thing to know is that science is an exercise in
independent critical thinking not rote memorization and regurgitation of facts.
Thanks to a poor education system many people get through high school and even
college without ever experiencing inquiry-based science learning. To do real
science for the sake of informed decision-making means thinking critically
about the information presented by the professional expert scientist. To read
critically look at the citations for every fact they present. Ask yourself the
following questions.
Are their citations to formally written scientific papers?
If those papers are very new are, they posted in formal scientific forums and
archives? If those papers are a year or more old are, they published with a DOI
with some degree of peer review? If those papers are more than a year old have,
they been cited by anyone else?
Anyone can engage in a critical thinking process, at some
level, to make an informed decision about their health. Nothing mentioned
above requires special training beyond clicking the links that should be at the
bottom of any scientific paper. New articles should link to the scientific
paper with full reference information. They should also, if not written by a
scientist, give a quote from the scientist they write about and one from another
scientist who has read the paper. When reading news articles about a hot new
scientific topic the best sign that it is professionally written is if it gives
you the impression that they are not 100% sure of the findings.
The round Earth being a place where life evolved, where
humans can change the climate, which revolves around the Sun, and which formed billions
of years after the big bang are not hot new topics. A publication which denies
settled science is not a good place to look for science information.
The third is that thinking scientifically also means
thinking about the whole system not just what is right for you. This is
what we call scientific ethics. Suppose you feel like you have a
strong immune system and that if you get covid-19, aka CCP virus, it will not affect
you much. That is a valid finding for yourself. Thinking systemically and
ethically means considering what could happen to other people you may encounter
if they get it. People who are older or who have compromised or suppressed
immune systems could suffer.
Example: You are a strong guy and never get
sick, exercise, and take care of yourself, and are not afraid.
Quite possibly you have a particularly strong immune
system which may not be normal or average. One of the strongest biases can
be thinking your own case or experience are the same as everyone else’s. Immune
system strength can be influenced by general health, but it can also influence
general health. Often an immune system that is too strong or too active can be
a problem (allergies at the mild end or autoimmune disorders at the more serious
end of the spectrum.) Then there are those who are healthy and normal but
catch most every virus that comes around. For them this could be a miserable
ordeal even if it does not kill them.
You decide to ask “Should I wear a mask even if I don’t
think I will get sick?” Then you Google and see the information from the
WHO which says not to wear a mask unless you are sick. Then you google to
see what the
CDC says and they say you should wear a mask if you are in a community setting.
Here we have the World Health Organization contradicting the US Centers for
Disease Control. Who should you listen to?
How not to decide:
The WHO represents the world and is not ran by Trump therefore they are who I
will listen to.
The CDC is ran by good Americans and the WHO is influenced by
the Chinese Communist Party.
Those are both true and valid ideological points of emotion,
politics, geopolitics, and realpolitik. However, they are scientifically
irrelevant to the question you are asking.
How to decide:
Look at each page and consider the sources they cite as well
as the context and audience they are for. The WHO website cites white paper
published by them. Such papers by large institutions do not undergo external
peer review but are usually reliable. The white paper itself cites 26 more
sources. https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/331695/WHO-2019-nCov-IPC_PPE_use-2020.3-eng.pdf
The CDC website https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prevent-getting-sick/cloth-face-cover.html
Cites seven studies which say that face mask help. This website is equivalent
to a white paper as like such a paper it gets vetted by the scientist who work
for such a large organization. However, it too has not been externally
reviewed.
The tie breaker is using your own critical thinking. The WHO is
writing for a global audience. That could mean anywhere from big cities to
the deep isolated deserts. The CDC says you do, they are writing for a US
American audience taking account of local conditions, namely active community-based
transmission. Think of where you are going is it more like the average world
conditions or more of a crowded condition.
Going to jog alone or with one friend on an isolated trail
or to work alone in the back yard or to swim at a nearly empty beach likely does
not require a mask.
Going to the grocery store, just after work, when it is
going to be crowded, going to a bar to sip a beer (you lower the mask for a sip
and put it back up ), going to a memorial day barbque where your grandfather
who fought in Vietnam at the battle of An Loc. Then you need to think about
the possibly weaker people around you and wear a mask.
Since conditions could change from crowded to not crowded
maybe keeping a mask handy is the best compromise. You can wear it if you have
no choice but to be too close to a large group of people.
The last part of critical thinking is to challenge your
own thoughts. Be your own worst critic. Question everything. Maybe you
should wear a mask even while jogging in an isolated place since your germs
could linger in the area for hours. Maybe you should not wear a mask at the
store since you want to get other to “herd immunity”. Maybe it is grandfather
war hero’s time to go, old people dying is natural?
Then after you have thought critically and challenged your
own thoughts it is time to think ethically.
Between wearing a mask and not wearing one which choice can
cause harm to someone else?
Personally, I wear a mask when out in public places to
protect others from any possible infection in my family as well as to give a
measure of protection to my family. I do not wear a mask in the backyard or
in the car driving to a public place.
The same holds for medicines.
Consider people who wish to ask their doctor to put them on Hydroxychloroquine.
One can find papers that say it is poison. One can find papers that say it is
preventative. The way to think critically about those papers is to consider
the sample sizes. A study of 1000 people is more significant than a study of
100. Then there is the ethical consideration can take this medication harm
anyone else but me?
In summary
Make a sound decision on mask wearing and the many
experimental drugs. Think critically, think systemically, think ethically.
Those three things are the bedrock of thinking scientifically. Don’t wear a
mask because authorities say so, don’t refuse a mask because an authority
figure does not. Make your own real choices. Consider the conditions you are
going into if you are sick but asymptomatic will you make a couple dozen other
people sick?
