Diversifying Science | Observing Science

There is abundant evidence both that having diverse teams increases creativity and productivity, and that science is not as diverse as it could and should be. Much like many endeavors that have been the province of the privileged, science has long been overrepresented with persons from majority groups, and from higher socioeconomic classes. In some respect, science is what you can do if you can afford to spend the years in a lengthy (and often expensive) education, and then engage in a field that probably does not remunerate you as much as other fields might if one applied the same aptitude and education. This has created problematic lack of diversity and of representation among scientists, and almost certainly science has suffered as a result.

The good news is that the lack of diversity among scientists has been amply noted in the past decade and substantial efforts are underway to diversify fields, to ensure that persons engaged represent much better the societies within which science operates. We are optimistic that we are headed in the right direction.

Read more here.

Introducing Observing Science | The Healthiest Goldfish

A new essay series, written with Michael Stein, on the workings of science, the challenges it faces, and its potential to shape a healthier future.

Last week, I announced the launch of The Turning Point, a new book based on a series of essays written in collaboration with my friend and colleague, Michael Stein. Today, I am delighted to introduce a new series of essays Michael and I will be co-writing, to be released each Tuesday through Public Health Post.

For those who are new to Public Health Post, it is our public health science translational website, which we have run as a school for eight years now. Deeply shaped by the vision of its founding Editor-in-Chief, our late and much missed colleague David Jones, it features articles by our faculty, and by writers from around the world. PHP also hosts a student fellowship where every year five fellows join the PHP team to write pieces, as a way of educating the next generation of public health communicators. PHP has been a delight of a project, a wonderful link between education and translating science. You can find PHP here, and if you want to get the PHP weekly digest you can sign up here.

Read more here

Game Changer | Observing Science

Now that the Super Bowl is over, American football’s attention is focused on the draft to select a group of new players. The players, trained and developed across hundreds of universities, are chosen to join those already on the roster to make what could become–is expected to become–a better team. At every draft turn, the team chooses the “best available” player who might add an important piece, looking to strengthen the team’s prospects. And, most of the time, as new players are added, teams get a bit better, play at a higher level.

In the best circumstance, science operates as a team, and it is the addition of new scientists who bring new ideas, new ways to play, that advance our understanding. Thought of in this way, science is a shared undertaking, drafting the best available players. We think of science as a team that is never perfect, never unbeatable, but always looking to improve and meet changing challenges.

Read more here.

Introducing The Turning Point | The Healthiest Goldfish

A new book, written with Michael Stein, which looks backward and forward through the lens of the COVID moment.

In 2021, the US was at a turning point. We had just lived through the acute phase of a global pandemic. During that time, the country had experienced an economic crisis, civil unrest, a deeply divisive federal election, and a technological revolution in how we live, work, and congregate. The emergence of COVID-19 vaccines allowed us, finally, to look ahead to a post-pandemic world, but what would that world be like? Would it be a return to the pre-COVID status quo, or would it be something radically new?

It was with these questions in mind that, in 2021, I partnered with my good colleague, Michael Stein, to write a series of essays reflecting on the COVID-19 pandemic. Our aim with the essays was to engage with the COVID moment through the lens of cutting-edge public health science. By exploring the pandemic’s intersection with topics like digital surveillance, vaccine distribution, big data, and the link between science and political decision-making, we tried to sketch what the moment meant while it unfolded, and what its implications might be for the future. If journalism is “the first rough draft of history”, these essays were, in a way, our effort to produce just such a draft, from the perspective of a forward-looking public health. I am delighted to announce that a book based on this series of essays has just been published by Oxford University Press. Its title is The Turning Point: Reflections on a Pandemic.

Read more here.

Can We Communicate Science Better in the Age of TikTok? | Observing Science

Not so long ago, communicating ideas to the general public required access to a newspaper with wide circulation or to a broadcast studio. Now, anyone with an internet connection can, at least theoretically, reach massive numbers of people through a variety of digital communication platforms.

Social media has exploded as a form of information exchange. Facebook had 2.4 billion users in 2019 and 79% of adults in the U.S. use social media. This is also, of course, generationally patterned. About a third of Americans under 30 now get their news from TikTok and fewer than half from television.

Read more here.

When should institutions take sides? | The Healthiest Goldfish

On determining when institutions should formally address contemporary issues.

In recent weeks, there has been much conversation about the role of institutions like universities and corporations in the public debate about issues of consequence. Questions have emerged about when institutions should take a public position on issues, or, indeed, whether they should be taking positions at all. Today’s essay is a synthesis of prior writing I have done on the subject, engaging with the role of institutions in a time of political disruption, global unrest, and social change, towards doing right by our mission in pursuit of health.

As Dean of a school of public health, I come to this from a particular perspective, informed by my work in an academic setting. However, the following thoughts could well apply to any institution as it grapples with how to engage with this moment when much is at stake and the prospects of both speaking out and not speaking out on issues of consequence can feel equally fraught.

Read more here.

Observing Science: An Introduction | Observing Science

On the workings of science, its limitations, and its promise for a healthier world

Science is our demand that things make sense. We think of science as a modern discipline, systematic and skeptical in its approach and aiming at well-defined results and conceptual clarity. The data that inform science are argued about and interpreted in lecture halls and seminar rooms. Science is written down, following particular approaches, so that it can be replicable.

Much of science is done to prove or disprove ideas and test theories, but its discoveries—observations and evidence—are meant to be useful, although sometimes the uses are far-off. Science has always been a way to know nature, or in the biomedical and population health sciences, our subjects here, the contexts and forces that create the health of humans.

Read more here.

Some thoughts on free speech | The Healthiest Goldfish

On balancing a commitment to free expression with the values of civility, inclusivity, and respect for all.

Few subjects are as fundamental to our society as our engagement with speech. It concerns nothing less than the expression of the ideas that are at the heart of all we do. In recent weeks, there has been much conversation about, well, conversation—about the exchange of ideas in the public debate. Emotionally charged subjects like the Israel-Hamas war and the daily drama of politics in the US and globally have raised perennial questions about how we should conduct ourselves in the central debates of the moment. We are in a time when we continually face questions like: how can we have conversations that are inclusive and respectful, while honoring our commitment to free speech? What limits, if any, should we place on expression? How can we speak in ways that are true to all our values, not just some?

Read more here