Science says...but my group chat disagrees
Even self-proclaimed science supporters have blind spots when misinformation fits their worldview.
This newsletter is free, but it’s able to sustain itself from support I receive from a small percentage of regular readers. If you value science-based information, consider upgrading to a paid subscription:
Tired of seeing evidence get steamrolled by vibes and wellness profiteering? Me too.
We are currently living in an era where where medical conspiracism is overtaking robust scientific research across the board. Now, with RFK Jr., Marty Makary, Mehmet Oz, and other wellness charlatans taking control of our health and science agencies here in the US, science is under attack at every turn.
The common thread of science rejection? Identity and ideological beliefs.
My 2024 CSICon talk last October in Las Vegas, “Echo Chambers vs. Evidence: Ideological Conflicts in Science Acceptance,” discusses exactly this: how ideology hijacks scientific discourse.
It’s not just anti-vax MAHA influencers—it's also liberal wellness warriors warning you about "toxic" food dyes and pushing fear-based organic purity myths.
Republicans may reject climate science and worship ivermectin (ironically, FDA-approved for medical indications it actually works for), but Democrats are complicit too—in fact, the original anti-vaccine activists were overwhelming politically liberal. Democrats and policies they’ve enacted have legitimized chemophobia, rejection of life-saving biotechnologies (like GMO food crops), and the myth that synthetic chemicals are inherently “bad” compared to natural ones.
Different tribes, same science denial.
(Yes, I am looking at politicians like Cory Booker and his alliances with anti-science organizations like Moms Across America, the Environmental Working Group, and the OG wellness charlatan Mark Hyman.)
Watch my full presentation from CSICon 2024 below:
This and other presentations from CSICon are also on the Skeptical Inquirer website.
Do you agree with the below sign yet believe organic is better than conventional, that EWG’s “Dirty Dozen” list is credible, or GMOs are harmful?
Hate to break it to you, but you’ve fallen victim to ideology too.
Scientific evidence is in a tug-of-war with political, social, and ideological beliefs.
From crunchy left-wing GMO panic to right-wing medical conspiracy rabbit holes, I discuss why people trust their group chats more than experts—and how we can fight back. It’s more relevant than ever as science and public health are being erased in favor of wellness profiteering.
Selective rejection of science is exacerbated by the misinformation ecosystem:
Media Sensationalism: media headlines or stories amplify falsehoods using clickbait, mischaracterize data, ignore context of a study as it pertains to biological relevance, and make conclusions without evidence. This is most frequently when media outlets talk about risks of chemicals, like pesticides.
Misinterpretation of Science: Unfortunately, everyone cannot do their own research. This is true even within the scientific communities. For example, a public health scientists does not have the biological science expertise to determine whether a biological research model is appropriate or relevant to answer a question. This was illustrated in the “tampon study” which I dissected here.
Using the wrong experts: Unfortunately, media outlets, social media pages, and even other science communicators amplify and platform tangential, but not appropriate experts. For example, if you are discussing the safety of a chemical used in a skincare product, dermatologists are not the experts. Toxicologists and chemists are. As a result, irrelevant experts can be major drivers of misinformation.
Clean and Green Movement: the appeal to nature fallacy drives false notions that natural products, chemicals, medical interventions are superior, when this is objectively false. This is driven by “clean” and “green” marketing where “all natural” products are sold under the guise of being safer, better, more eco-friendly, while they frequently lack evidence to these claims.
Social Media and Influencers: We are living in a world where celebrities, number of followers, and number of sponsors are conflated with credibility. As a result, social media platforms and influencers disseminate & amplify falsehoods, often as they profit from misinformation.
This is true for everyone, even among people who legitimately believe they follow “the science” on topics.
Ideologies, belief systems, and communities cause people to refuse to accept evidence about a scientific topic even when they will on another. This has accelerated in recent years with the polarization of our society and cult-like communities shaped by social media and parasocial relationships.
Everyone can fall prey to science rejection. When you think you’re not at risk is when you’re most vulnerable.
For more on this, check out a couple related articles I’ve written previously:
Let's work together to improve science literacy and health
When pseudoscience, misinformation, and anti-science beliefs lead to implementation of regulations, laws, or policies that are not aligned with robust scientific evidence it legitimizes that misinformation.
Why do people selectively reject science?
Ideologies, belief systems, and communities cause people to refuse to accept evidence about a scientific topic even when they will on another. This has accelerated in recent years with the polarization of our society and cult-like communities shaped by social media and parasocial relationships. But let’s be clear: everyone can fall prey to science rejection. When you think you’re not at risk, that’s when you’re most vulnerable.
Anti-science misinformation spreads like a virus. To stop the spread, we must all play an active role in combating harmful myths that target facts, reality, and public health.
Now, more than ever, we all must join in the fight for science.
Thank you for supporting evidence-based science communication. With outbreaks of preventable diseases, refusal of evidence-based medical interventions, propagation of pseudoscience by prominent public “personalities”, it’s needed now more than ever.
More science education, less disinformation.
- Andrea
ImmunoLogic is written by Dr. Andrea Love, PhD - immunologist and microbiologist. She works full-time in life sciences biotech and has had a lifelong passion for closing the science literacy gap and combating pseudoscience and health misinformation as far back as her childhood. This newsletter and her science communication on her social media pages are born from that passion. Follow on Instagram, Threads, Twitter, and Facebook, or support the newsletter by subscribing below:
No, more than ever, we need voices like yours! I hear some pretty incredible things, but people like you enable me to correct misinformation - gently and politely.