I'm constantly amazed that you can give people all of the information that you have on a subject that you're objectively extremely knowledgeable about, and it just doesn't matter because they're going to make the wrong decision anyway.
Here's where I really struggle, though. When they come back to you later and are suffering from said choice, and all you want to do internally is scream "I TOLD YOU SO" but you go out of your way to help them with the consequences of their bad decisions. And they still decide to do something else. But you can't help yourself from thinking "I'm going to get the next one! We're going to save some lives."
It's almost like we should have a reliable source of information for protecting your health and safety, that people would trust. Maybe it could be federally funded or something, and be comprised of top scientists who could lend their expert, unencumbered by capitalism or politics, advice. People could refer to this organization, or center, perhaps, and understand that they could trust their advice. So scientists and other knowledgeable people could give advice, and then direct people to the trusted, central knowledge source.
Bear with me here while I think this through.
Maybe, they could give expert info on things like keeping your water clean, or diseases. When paper after paper says things like microplastics are bad and keep showing up internally in people in gallstones, eyes, heart plaques, etc., or when decades of science says that PFAs are linked to dozens or health problems, including a lesser response to vaccines for the disease they'd want to, perhaps, "prevent" they'd give timely advice on how to do things like remove them from their drinking water so people aren't left to figure it out for themselves.
They'd never give shit advice like "If your drinking water is contaminated above levels specified by the EPA or your state government, use an alternate water source for drinking, preparing food, cooking, brushing teeth, and any other activity when you might swallow water" while people do their own research and make decisions that fly against the science of the matter, because, hey, it's an "alternate source" right?
No, they'd give real, practical, timely advice to keep the citizens under their watch healthy.
I'm not going to lie. Today I find myself exhausted in a way that I haven't since 2021 when it was obvious that we were going to sweep COVID under the rug.
It really doesn't matter if the topic is COVID, climate change or pollution.
"Hey, please tell me what I should do."
"OK, here you go. This is all the best science."
"Uhhhh, yikes. Nope."
*Time passes*
"So, hey, I have this super bad health problem. You have any ideas?"
*head explodes*
So, go ahead society at large. Burn your fossil fuels, slurp up all those microplastics and PFAs, and raw dog all that virus-laden air. No one's stopping you except yourself, and you don't seem able to stop.
THIS is why so many scientists who could be helping eventually give up, or take that huge paycheck from UltraMegaEvilCorp to do the opposite of what they used to do.
@BE I totally get it. The worst ones are the disingenuous questions that are not asked because they want an answer, but are asked because they want you to waste your time answering when they won't even listen to the answer anyway.
For those of us who try to base our beliefs on evidence, it seems obvious to explain that evidence to the uninformed, but it doesn't always work like that and that's why you get stressed out.
One way to enable the genuinely curious to grow and learn, while at the same time deflecting the disingenuous, and saving yourself some stress, is a technique known as #StreetEpistemology
Here is a very short video of how it works. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ASn-VdevwTE&t=2s
