What percentage of the population is scientifically literate?

[Anonymous]

How many are mathematically literate? Most cant even give a tip without a calculator or prompt on a screen.

How many are literate in art theory?

Why does being “scientifically literate” matter to you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ones who scream the loudest about #science! tend to be the most illiterate, in my experience. No one reads the actual studies. Social media has opened my eyes to so many friends and acquaintances who always seemed really smart, but really aren’t.

No I think it's the people calling for Fauci to be prosecuted, Nuremberg style, who are the most scientifically illiterate.

If we are to be honest, Fauci did lie/distort/obscure many things surrounding COVID, the origin of COVID, and the effectiveness of the vaccines and masking as well as handling children and COVID. He was not upfront about a great deal of things and that is what infuriates people.

I'm a firm believer in the effectiveness of the vaccine but even I can tell Fauci was less than honest and went out of his way to shut down scientific debates on the origin of COVID early and whether it was natural or created in the Wuhan lab. He was very much part of the politicization of COVID. He surely justified it in the name of greater public good, but at the same time there's no disputing he blatantly lied about a lot of things. And being deliberately vague and careful in certain word usage to imply something while making sure the word used doesn't guarantee it is no different from lying.

As OP is talking about scientifically literate, a good example would be understanding the difference between science and public health policy, which is not the same thing. Science is based on an objective quest for truth, and during COVID we saw way too much abuse in the name of science, effectively turning it into dogma rather than a quest for truth. Like the public health officials in the summer of 2020 who mandated social distancing, except for BLM protests.

I must admit I was always amused by the in this house we believe in science mantra. You don't believe in science. You believe in religion.

Just two more weeks . . .

[Anonymous]

Constant access to articles and journals via our phones is the biggest problem. I am a doctor, and was talking to one of the maintenance guys in our building. He held up his phone and said “this is the great equalizer. When I’m at the doctor and he tells me something, I can look it up on my phone and tell him if he’s right or wrong.” ?!?!? People actually think this way. That googling something is the equivalent of 4 years undergrad plus 4 years Med school plus residency plus years of practice and continuing education. It’s baffling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Constant access to articles and journals via our phones is the biggest problem. I am a doctor, and was talking to one of the maintenance guys in our building. He held up his phone and said “this is the great equalizer. When I’m at the doctor and he tells me something, I can look it up on my phone and tell him if he’s right or wrong.” ?!?!? People actually think this way. That googling something is the equivalent of 4 years undergrad plus 4 years Med school plus residency plus years of practice and continuing education. It’s baffling.

Don't worry; these people will soon be able to use AI to double-check your work. After all, AI was trained with the knowledge of Internet medical experts. It's AI, it's not wrong. Just like, "I read it on the Internet. It must be true."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Looks like 25%:

https://www.washlit.org/single-post/2020/05/04/Left-Behind-DCs-Literacy-Divide

This article cites PIAAC data. Here is a link with a wide variety of literacy/numeracy data that is tracked at the county level.

https://nces.ed.gov/surveys/piaac/skillsmap/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you can consume research well without ever having done it yourself, you are a very rare person. Statistics alone is such a challenge to understand. So I'd say very few people. A very small percentage. But we don't all need to be all that scientifically literate. We just have to be smart enough to make good decisions about what media we trust to interpret it for us.

But most journalists are clearly scientifically illiterate...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ones who scream the loudest about #science! tend to be the most illiterate, in my experience. No one reads the actual studies. Social media has opened my eyes to so many friends and acquaintances who always seemed really smart, but really aren’t.

No I think it's the people calling for Fauci to be prosecuted, Nuremberg style, who are the most scientifically illiterate.

Well, that means you haven't followed adequate news sources, where Fauci's own emails reveal that: 1) he lied about things that he knew were untrue; 2) suppressed dissenting scientific opinions; 3) funded gain-of-function research internationally with U.S. tax funds to avoid U.S. bans; and 4) perjured himself before Congress about 1-3.

He also positioned himself as the public health "leader" when he has no background in public health and sinned against true science by saying that anyone who criticized him was criticizing science itself. True scientists know that science is humble and continually questioning. There is no such thing as "settled" science. - So, yeah, he is not my hero.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you can consume research well without ever having done it yourself, you are a very rare person. Statistics alone is such a challenge to understand. So I'd say very few people. A very small percentage. But we don't all need to be all that scientifically literate. We just have to be smart enough to make good decisions about what media we trust to interpret it for us.

But most journalists are clearly scientifically illiterate...

PP here. No doubt. It's a problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A very small percentage. I think people who don’t understand statistics (which is most people IME) or logic (also most people) are fundamentally incapable of understanding science.

Sadly I also think the majority of people don’t have any clue how much capitalism dictates scientific study. Not necessarily for any intentionally nefarious purposes, but scientists need to have their research funded, and journals like to have their publications subscribed to, and all of this means that what is being studied and what is being reported is heavily influenced by those (most likely scientifically ignorant) who control the purse strings.

Agree with this... AND the fact that even if you understand research, there is a high probability that it is wrong...

Nice videos discussing this:
"Is Most Published Research Wrong?"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=42QuXLucH3Q

"Is There a Reproducibility Crisis in Science?"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FpCrY7x5nEE

Finally, in addition to capitalism, there is ideology. There are serious downsides to even studying certain questions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We've seen that public health officials are not literate.

They are credentialed but poorly educated and very, very stupid.

I'm in public health and was embarrassed by the performance of some leaders. I'm not sure who you have in mind, but certainly many people let ideology trump their understanding of basic science. And within public health, there are multiple disciplines. Please don't tarnish all of us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Constant access to articles and journals via our phones is the biggest problem. I am a doctor, and was talking to one of the maintenance guys in our building. He held up his phone and said “this is the great equalizer. When I’m at the doctor and he tells me something, I can look it up on my phone and tell him if he’s right or wrong.” ?!?!? People actually think this way. That googling something is the equivalent of 4 years undergrad plus 4 years Med school plus residency plus years of practice and continuing education. It’s baffling.

To be fair, medical school and a three week rotation in a topic don't make physicians experts on all health related matters. And it is impossible for physicians to stay current on all areas of research. I'm not saying your maintenance guy has better knowledge, but it is important to acknowledge that physicians don't hold all medical knowledge, and especially as they age, fall behind on state-of-the art care.

[Anonymous]

Given that the NYTimes regularly confounds causation and correlation - I think a vanishingly small number of people are actually scientifically literate - maybe 1%? And even if they know the difference between a RCT and observational study, even fewer people actually make decisions based on logic and evidence regarding risks and benefits. I have very smart friends who make health decisions based on “what other people are doing” instead of actually understanding & weighing risks and benefits for themselves.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A very small percentage. I think people who don’t understand statistics (which is most people IME) or logic (also most people) are fundamentally incapable of understanding science.

Sadly I also think the majority of people don’t have any clue how much capitalism dictates scientific study. Not necessarily for any intentionally nefarious purposes, but scientists need to have their research funded, and journals like to have their publications subscribed to, and all of this means that what is being studied and what is being reported is heavily influenced by those (most likely scientifically ignorant) who control the purse strings.

absolutely. I have this argument sometimes on the SN board. People who think that the trendy fMRI studies of brains are going to lead to a new autism therapy or diagnosis. when the money should actually be going to identify which therapies actually produce improvements now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ones who scream the loudest about #science! tend to be the most illiterate, in my experience. No one reads the actual studies. Social media has opened my eyes to so many friends and acquaintances who always seemed really smart, but really aren’t.

No I think it's the people calling for Fauci to be prosecuted, Nuremberg style, who are the most scientifically illiterate.

If we are to be honest, Fauci did lie/distort/obscure many things surrounding COVID, the origin of COVID, and the effectiveness of the vaccines and masking as well as handling children and COVID. He was not upfront about a great deal of things and that is what infuriates people.

I'm a firm believer in the effectiveness of the vaccine but even I can tell Fauci was less than honest and went out of his way to shut down scientific debates on the origin of COVID early and whether it was natural or created in the Wuhan lab. He was very much part of the politicization of COVID. He surely justified it in the name of greater public good, but at the same time there's no disputing he blatantly lied about a lot of things. And being deliberately vague and careful in certain word usage to imply something while making sure the word used doesn't guarantee it is no different from lying.

As OP is talking about scientifically literate, a good example would be understanding the difference between science and public health policy, which is not the same thing. Science is based on an objective quest for truth, and during COVID we saw way too much abuse in the name of science, effectively turning it into dogma rather than a quest for truth. Like the public health officials in the summer of 2020 who mandated social distancing, except for BLM protests.

I must admit I was always amused by the in this house we believe in science mantra. You don't believe in science. You believe in religion.

yeah - this is because the goal of public health is not and has never been “get the public to understand the scientific method.” the goal of public health is “get the public to adopt the behaviors that the public health experts and politicians have jointly decided is desireable.” this involves propaganda and sometimes legal coercion - not educating the public on how science is done.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Constant access to articles and journals via our phones is the biggest problem. I am a doctor, and was talking to one of the maintenance guys in our building. He held up his phone and said “this is the great equalizer. When I’m at the doctor and he tells me something, I can look it up on my phone and tell him if he’s right or wrong.” ?!?!? People actually think this way. That googling something is the equivalent of 4 years undergrad plus 4 years Med school plus residency plus years of practice and continuing education. It’s baffling.

I think you need a little humility. I’ve actually been in the ER googling my condition and then discussed the latest medication recommendations with the doctor, which changed what he prescribed. Similarly with my child, looking up the risks of sedation for a non-urgent MRI they were pushing to do ASAP. Likewise for myself, I’ve done a lot of research on sleep medications to understand why my doctor doesn’t want to prescribe benzos.

I definitely don’t think I know better than my doctors. If I did, I would go to a different doctor! But I am always going to do my own research when it comes to a serious condition/medication/intervention. The key is that this is the basis for a conversation with my doctor and shared decisionmaking.