14 THE SCIENTIST | the-scientist.com
and attacks on doctors, is testament to this flagrant rejection of
expertise. It also underscores the urgency of addressing rather
than ignoring this problem.
The solution lies in recognizing that people do not develop sus-
picions about scientists and medical experts in a vacuum. Some
may have had horrible experiences with the healthcare system. Per-
haps their health concerns were rudely scoffed at by contemptuous
doctors. Some people reject what today’s experts say because yes-
terday’s experts said the opposite—a normal occurrence in the pro-
cess of science but one that nonetheless can come across as incon-
sistent to people unfamiliar with such dynamics. And then there
are issues concerning pharmaceutical companies and governments
the world over that have made serious blunders in the past, from
scandalously precipitating the opioid epidemic to sending confus-
ing messages about the COVID-19 pandemic. While these reasons
do not justify dismissal of entire professions or of the biomedical
enterprise, acknowledging them should engender the empathy you
need to have a constructive dialogue with skeptics.
According to some researchers, distrust of experts is com-
pounded by coordinated “anti-science” attacks intended to advance
political agendas. Certain pundits and politicians, especially in the
US of late, have amassed great popularity in their public dismissal
of mainstream science and medicine. Whether their bashing of
expertise is a genuine belief or merely a dubious ploy for attention
or political gain, the end result is the same: the public gets con-
fused. Unsubstantiated claims gain an air of acceptance simply by
being amplified and discussed, which elevates their promoters at
the expense of experts. Many people have not had the privilege of
learning how to critically evaluate this plethora of conflicting infor-
mation. Rather than blaming the victim for being lured away by a
siren’s song, we should learn to sing a more appealing tune.
I participate in a lot of science outreach activities and occasion-
ally encounter people who are suspicious of me or scoff at the infor-
mation I present. Here are some of the strategies I employ based
on what I’ve learned from these experiences so far.Get curious
We cannot stem the tide of anti-science without understanding
the forces involved. Scientists and doctors should treat science
skepticism as a mystery that needs solving. Someone who is
skeptical of science isn’t going to be swayed by more science,
so switch from preaching to sleuthing. Why did this individual
depart from the mainstream? What life experience led them to
their unorthodox belief? By finding the clues needed to under-
stand different worldviews, you not only gather vital intelli-
gence about the source of these beliefs, but you also signal tothe science skeptic that you respect them enough to learn more
about them. Showing compassion is a crucial step toward alter-
ing the perception of professionals as snobby elitists hellbent
on controlling the lives of others. As Dale Carnegie wrote in
How to Win Friends and Influence People, “Instead of con-
demning people, let’s try to understand them.... That’s a lot
more profitable and intriguing than criticism; and it breeds
sympathy, tolerance, and kindness.”Find common ground
To win back trust, the elitist stereotype associated with creden-
tials must be dispelled. All of us wear many different hats, and
our professional cap is not always the best one to justify our
beliefs. As you listen to a science skeptic tell his story, take note
of what he cares about. Then, speak not as a scientist or doc-
tor, but as a person who shares one or more of his values. For
example, speak as a fellow parent, patriot, hobbyist, or member
of the same political party or religion. People rarely get to see
the non-professional side of a scientist or doctor, and showing a
more relatable facet of your own experience is a promising way
to win back trust.Tell a compelling story
An effective tool of persuasion is storytelling—and all the more
so if stories are told with feeling. If you’re a scientist, build up to
the findings of a study as if it were a compelling mystery. If you’re
a doctor, tell emotive stories about patients. Highlight the pro-
cess of science: yes, it can be messy, and results may conflict, but
it has proven to be the best way to uncover the truth in the long
run. Take care to restrain your anger and frustration if you fail to
see eye to eye. On the contrary, thank the person for listening and
engaging. Remember, a key objective is for them to have a posi-
tive experience with an expert.Be persistent, but patient
There are plenty of science and medical skeptics who are reason-
able and will be inclined to engage in dialogue, but it is naive to
think that one or a few encounters will turn the tide of their mis-
trust. Beliefs are like concrete and it usually takes many hits to
break through. It can be arduous, but it is a wall worth knocking
down. Avoid playing into the stereotype of an alarmist or author-
itarian and maintain a hopeful attitude of respect and courtesy.We got into science and medicine to help people, and like it or not, that
includes those who have turned their back on the establishment.
As we are moved to care for the ill or to research biological ques-
tions, we should be moved to care for those who have been ill-
informed and to study the social phenomenon. When titles, posi-
tions, or credentials fail to persuade, we may still be able to make
headway by showing more heart and less mind. gBill Sullivan is the Showalter Professor of Pharmacology and Tox-
icology at Indiana University School of Medicine.We got into science and medicine to help
people, and like it or not, that includes
those who have turned their back on the
establishment.