Why public dismissal of nutrition science makes sense: Post-truth, public accountability and dietary credibility.

Bart Penders
Author Information
  1. Bart Penders: Department of Health, Ethics and Society, Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands. ORCID

Abstract

PURPOSE: The purpose of this paper is to critically engage with societal origins of public (dis)trust and public credibility of nutrition science and offer suggestions for addressing its public dismissal.
DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: This viewpoint presents a conceptual analysis of public dismissal of nutrition science, drawing together perspectives on the relationships between science and society from the history, sociology and philosophy of science.
FINDINGS: The origin of trust amongst scientists relies is actively tied to their social and moral status and science as a cultural activity is inextricably linked to institutions of power. Accordingly, trust in science relies heavily on public perceptions of those institutions, the ways in which citizens feel represented by them, and to what extent citizens consider these institutions to be held accountable. Ignoring this origin leads to expectations of science and scientists they cannot live up to and inevitable disappointment in those holding such expectations.
SOCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Managing responsible expectations asks that we first dismiss dominant portrayals of science as pure, neutral, value-free and fuelled by curiosity. Second, we should pursue a reorganisation of science, favouring social inclusiveness over scientific exceptionalism.
ORIGINALITY/VALUE: Post-truth dynamics are a source of concern in the dissemination of nutrition science. Rather than dismissing it as a consequence of public ignorance, a comprehensive engagement with post-truth arguments allows a constructive repositioning of nutrition science organisation and communication. It asks that we design research programmes and studies differently, incorporate different voices. Above all else, it asks humility of researchers and tolerant approaches to other perspectives.

Keywords

References

  1. Nat Genet. 2000 Nov;26(3):263 [PMID: 11062457]
  2. Early Sci Med. 1998 Feb;3(1):66-74 [PMID: 11620329]
  3. Appetite. 2007 May;48(3):333-7 [PMID: 17137678]
  4. Contemp Clin Trials. 2008 Mar;29(2):109-13 [PMID: 17919992]
  5. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2009 Jan;63(1):2-10 [PMID: 17928804]
  6. Nature. 2007 Nov 1;450(7166):33 [PMID: 17972866]
  7. Soc Sci Med. 2008 May;66(9):1909-14 [PMID: 18299169]
  8. EMBO Rep. 2009 Feb;10(2):114-9 [PMID: 19165141]
  9. EMBO Rep. 2009 Mar;10(3):205-8 [PMID: 19229281]
  10. EMBO Rep. 2009 Aug;10 Suppl 1:S18-22 [PMID: 19636298]
  11. EMBO Rep. 2013 Feb;14(2):112 [PMID: 23258259]
  12. JAMA. 2013 Feb 13;309(6):549-50 [PMID: 23262635]
  13. J Law Med Ethics. 2013 Fall;41(3):553-5 [PMID: 24088144]
  14. Adv Nutr. 2014 Jul 14;5(4):430-46 [PMID: 25022992]
  15. Kennedy Inst Ethics J. 2014 Sep;24(3):267-99 [PMID: 25423851]
  16. Minerva. 2015;53(2):117-139 [PMID: 26097258]
  17. Evid Based Med. 2016 Aug;21(4):125-7 [PMID: 27339128]
  18. Account Res. 2017;24(3):127-151 [PMID: 28001440]
  19. Environ Eng Sci. 2017 Jan 1;34(1):51-61 [PMID: 28115824]
  20. J Public Health Policy. 2017 May;38(2):203-215 [PMID: 28386099]
  21. Ann Intern Med. 2017 Jun 20;166(12):899-900 [PMID: 28418517]
  22. Nature. 2017 Apr 21;544(7651):404-405 [PMID: 28447657]
  23. N Engl J Med. 2017 Jul 13;377(2):188-191 [PMID: 28514226]
  24. Eur J Nutr. 2017 Sep;56(6):2009-2012 [PMID: 28718015]
  25. EMBO Rep. 2017 Sep;18(9):1486-1489 [PMID: 28821534]
  26. Soc Stud Sci. 2016 Oct;46(5):749-772 [PMID: 28948882]
  27. Minerva. 2017;55(4):391-411 [PMID: 29200503]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0sciencepublicnutritiontrustdismissalinstitutionsexpectationsasksPost-truthcredibilityperspectivesoriginscientistsreliessocialcitizensPURPOSE:purposepapercriticallyengagesocietaloriginsdisoffersuggestionsaddressingDESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH:viewpointpresentsconceptualanalysisdrawingtogetherrelationshipssocietyhistorysociologyphilosophyFINDINGS:amongstactivelytiedmoralstatusculturalactivityinextricablylinkedpowerAccordinglyheavilyperceptionswaysfeelrepresentedextentconsiderheldaccountableIgnoringleadsliveinevitabledisappointmentholdingSOCIALIMPLICATIONS:Managingresponsiblefirstdismissdominantportrayalspureneutralvalue-freefuelledcuriositySecondpursuereorganisationfavouringinclusivenessscientificexceptionalismORIGINALITY/VALUE:dynamicssourceconcerndisseminationRatherdismissingconsequenceignorancecomprehensiveengagementpost-truthargumentsallowsconstructiverepositioningorganisationcommunicationdesignresearchprogrammesstudiesdifferentlyincorporatedifferentvoiceselsehumilityresearcherstolerantapproachesmakessense:accountabilitydietaryCredibility

Similar Articles

Cited By