Author:
Komesaroff Paul A.,Dwyer Dominic E.
Abstract
AbstractIntense public interest in scientific claims about COVID-19, concerning its origins, modes of spread, evolution, and preventive and therapeutic strategies, has focused attention on the values to which scientists are assumed to be committed and the relationship between science and other public discourses. A much discussed claim, which has stimulated several inquiries and generated far-reaching political and economic consequences, has been that SARS-CoV-2 was deliberately engineered at the Wuhan Institute of Virology and then, either inadvertently or otherwise, released to the public by a laboratory worker. This has been pursued despite a clear refutation, through comprehensive genomic analysis, of the hypothesis that the virus was deliberately engineered and the failure of detailed investigations to identify any evidence in support of a laboratory leak. At the same time a substantial, established body of knowledge about the many factors underlying the emergence of novel zoonotic diseases has been largely ignored—including climate change and other mechanisms of environmental destruction, tourism, patterns of trade, and cultural influences. The existence and conduct of these debates have raised questions about the vulnerability of science to manipulation for political purposes. Scientific discourses are vulnerable because: (i) claims can be made with no more than probabilistic force; (ii) alleged “facts” are always subject to interpretation, which depends on social, ethical, and epistemological assumptions; and (iii) science and scientists are not inherently committed to any single set of values and historically have served diverse, and sometimes perverse, social and political interests. In the face of this complexity, the COVID-19 experience highlights the need for processes of ethical scrutiny of the scientific enterprise and its strategic deployment. To ensure reliability of truth claims and protection from corrupting influences robust ethical discourses are required that are independent of, and at times even contrary to, those of science itself.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Health Policy,Health (social science)
Reference40 articles.
1. Andersen, K.G., A. Rambaut, W.I. Lipkin, E. Holmes, and R.F. Garry. 2020. The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2. Nature Medicine 26: 450–455.
2. Bhattacharya, S., S. Sinha, D. Baidya, and R. Tilak. 2020. Emergence of a zoonotic pathogen - Novel Coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) in the context of changing environment. Journal of Communicable Diseases 52(2): 18–24.
3. Bloom, J.D. 2021. Recovery of deleted deep sequencing data sheds more light on the early Wuhan SARS-CoV- 2 epidemic. Molecular Biology and Evolution 2038(12): 5211–5224.
4. Brewster. J. 2021. Trump: “I have very little doubt” Covid came from Wuhan lab. Forbes Magazine, May 24. https://www.forbes.com/sites/jackbrewster/2021/05/24/trump-i-have-very-little-doubt-covid-came-from-wuhan-lab/?sh=9acdfc6539af. Accessed August 25, 2023.
5. Carlson, C.J., G. F. Albery, and A. Phelan. 2021. Preparing international cooperation on pandemic prevention for the Anthropocene. BMJ Global Health 6: e004254.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献