Science, Fast and Slow | Observing Science

Artificial Intelligence (AI) and CRISPR, two technologies developed over the last several decades, could change how we live and work for decades to come. Both entered wider public awareness only in the past year with readily usable products, namely ChatGPT and an FDA-approved treatment for sickle cell anemia developed with gene editing. These innovations have been met with a mix of enthusiasm, and caution. There is no argument that CRISPR helping treat sickle cell anemia is wonderful. But could CRISPR be used to manipulate genetic code in harmful ways? Likewise, AI could have enormously positive impacts on health care. But could it also have catastrophic effects?

Read more here.

When should we speak? | The Healthiest Goldfish

A meditation on when, why, and how academic leaders may consider speaking on contemporary issues.

In recent months, I have written a fair bit about the ongoing conflict in Gaza, trying to articulate my thoughts on a tragic and volatile situation. As I have done so, I have heard from many who read these essays, and I am grateful always for those who do write and comment. Some have agreed with what I have written. Some have disagreed. Some have wondered why I have written at all and challenged me for “pontificating.” And many have remarked that speaking is difficult in the moment, that it is safer not to speak at all. I read all comments carefully and try to reflect on them. All comments—even ones I disagree with— help sharpen my thinking and hopefully push me to be better at formulating what I write.

I am aware that this recent experience with public writing has been taking place against a backdrop of controversy about speech in academic spaces that has gained national attention. Questions have been raised about academia’s commitment to free speech and about the role of academic institutions in speaking out about current events. In the context of this debate, there have been calls for an adoption of institutional neutrality, in which academic institutions largely refrain from engaging with contemporary events and issues of consequence, and that academic leaders should follow suit. While there is much to recommend the idea of institutional neutrality as intended (more on that later), I worry that the general sway of public conversation swings—as it often does—to a binary, and that the moment is so fraught that, essentially, it suggest that we should not speak, about much, ever. 

So today, as I mentioned in last week’s THG, I thought I would try to address that, to put pen to paper and ask the question: when should we speak?

Read more here

Audiences | Observing Science

While scientists do much of their work alone—thinking, computing, pipetting, scanning, observing, recording, recoding, counting—we eventually present our work to different audiences. We present to other scientists in our field at small, closed-door meetings, expecting intense and detailed interrogation. We present to wider scientific groups at professional conferences where we must provide more background and context for our work. Sometimes, we present to a more general public, on radio or television, where translation from the jargon of our disciplines is what’s called for. The expectations from each audience are different and raise different questions.

Read more here.

Gaza, Israel, and the imperative of bearing witness | The Healthiest Goldfish

Thoughts on the unfolding tragedy in the Middle East.

I was today writing a piece on a different topic, but events in the Middle East seem to have overtaken all thoughts I was dedicating to other ideas, which I will get back to in time. I found myself immersed in reading and re-reading about the tragedy unfolding in the Middle East, and, with that backdrop, working to write a note to our community about my evolving thoughts on the issue. I rework here some of that piece for today’s essay. It will be a shorter essay than usual, reflecting, in part, the inadequacy of words in the face of human suffering and the truth that, for all the words that have been used to discuss this conflict, they all fall short of what we want to hear: that the war has ended, that the hostages have been freed, and that steps are being taken towards the creation of a lasting peace.

Read more here.

Authority | Observing Science

Einstein joked that “to punish me for my contempt for authority, Fate made me an authority myself.” His contempt was achieved honestly: he knew that his originality was based on doubting authority, by asking questions that challenge accepted answers. By becoming an authority himself, he had become someone who should be doubted, rather than a scientist whose role is to doubt. This is, in many ways, a fundamental challenge facing science: how to keep acquiring knowledge and wisdom through hard-won skepticism while also becoming experts who society turns to for certainty.

Read more here.

Admitting better, encouraging optimism | The Healthiest Goldfish

On “accentuating the positive” in our pursuit of health.

We are in the business of health. Core to this business is having conversations about how we can create better health by creating a healthier world. These conversations often involve talking about how the world is not yet healthy, about the diseases that keep populations sick and the injustices and inequities that drive this poor health. We have these conversations because we must, because we cannot solve problems without first naming them and studying them. My own writing is no exception. When I look back at my written output, I find much of it addresses how we can have less disease, with considerations of health sometimes taking a backseat to engaging with the challenges that can get in the way of health. This is perhaps as it should be. To this point, we have just published a note for our community about the threats to the values of inclusion, dignity for all, and health.  This all reminds us that a hallmark of health is that we do not think so much about it when we are healthy. We want to be healthy so we can live; when we are healthy, we are often so busy living that we do not think much about the health that enables this. On the other hand, when we are sick, even a little bit, it can be hard to think of anything else.

Read more here

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