1.5: What Is Science?

Ouch!

This individual in Figure \(\PageIndex{1}\) is getting a flu vaccine. You probably know that getting a vaccine can hurt, but it's usually worth it. A vaccine contains dead or altered forms of "germs" that normally cause a disease, such as flu or measles. The germs in vaccines have been inactivated or weakened so they can no longer cause illness, but they are still "noticed" by the immune system. They stimulate the immune system to produce chemicals that can kill the actual germs if they enter the body, thus preventing future disease. How was such an ingenious way to prevent disease discovered? The short answer is more than two centuries of science.

Figure \(\PageIndex{1}\): Getting an annual flu shot

Science as Process

You may think of science as a large and detailed body of knowledge, but science is actually more of a process than a set of facts. The real focus of science is the accumulation and revision of scientific knowledge. Science is a special way of gaining knowledge that relies on evidence and logic. Evidence is used to continuously test ideas. Through time, with repeated evidence gathering and testing, scientific knowledge advances.

We've been accumulating knowledge of vaccines for more than two centuries. The discovery of the first vaccine, as well as the process of vaccination, dates back to 1796. An English doctor named Edward Jenner observed that people who became infected with cowpox did not get sick from smallpox, a similar but much more virulent disease (Figure \(\PageIndex{2}\)). Jenner decided to transmit cowpox to a young child to see if it would protect them from smallpox. He gave the child cowpox by scratching liquid from cowpox sores into the child's skin. Then, six weeks later, he scratched liquid from smallpox sores into the child's skin. As Jenner predicted, the child did not get sick from smallpox. Jenner had discovered the first vaccine, although additional testing was needed to show that it really was effective.

Figure \(\PageIndex{2}\): A young child covered with skin lesions from smallpox. Until it was eradicated, this highly contagious infection caused many deaths, and those that survived were often severely scarred for life.

Almost a century passed before the next vaccine was discovered, a vaccine for cholera in 1879. Around the same time, French chemist Louis Pasteur found convincing evidence that many human diseases are caused by germs. This earned Pasteur the title of "father of germ theory." Since Pasteur's time, vaccines have been discovered for scores of additional diseases caused by "germs," and scientists are currently researching vaccines for many others.

Benefits of Science

Medical advances such as the discovery of vaccines are one of the most important benefits of science, but science and scientific knowledge are also crucial for most other human endeavors. Science is needed to design safe cars, predict storms, control global warming, develop new technologies of many kinds, help couples have children, and put humans on the moon! Clearly, the diversity of applications of scientific knowledge is vast!

The Dangers of Pseudoscience

Pseudoscience is a claim, belief, or practice that is presented as scientific but does not adhere to the standards and methods of science. True science is based on repeated evidence-gathering and testing of falsifiable hypotheses. Pseudoscience does not adhere to these criteria. Pseudoscience is often known as fringe or alternative science. It usually lacks the carefully-controlled and thoughtfully-interpreted experiments which provide the foundation of the natural sciences and which contribute to their advancement. In addition to phrenology, some other examples of pseudoscience include astrology, extrasensory perception (ESP), reflexology, reincarnation, and Scientology

Characteristics of Pseudoscience

Whether a field is actually science or just pseudoscience is not always clear. However, pseudoscience generally exhibits certain common characteristics. Indicators of pseudoscience include:

• The use of vague, exaggerated, or untestable claims: Many claims made by pseudoscience cannot be tested with evidence. As a result, they cannot be falsified, even if they are not true.
• An over-reliance on confirmation rather than refutation: Any incident that appears to justify a pseudoscience claim is treated as proof of the claim. Claims are assumed true until proven otherwise, and the burden of disproof is placed on skeptics of the claim.
• A lack of openness to testing by other experts: Practitioners of pseudoscience avoid subjecting their ideas to peer review. They may refuse to share their data and justify the need for secrecy with claims of proprietary or privacy.
• An absence of progress in advancing knowledge: In pseudoscience, ideas are not subjected to repeated testing followed by rejection or refinement, as hypotheses are in true science. Ideas in pseudoscience may remain unchanged for hundreds — or even thousands — of years. In fact, the older an idea is, the more it tends to be trusted in pseudoscience.
• Personalization of issues: Proponents of pseudoscience adopt beliefs that have little or no rational basis, so they may try to confirm their beliefs by treating critics as enemies. Instead of arguing to support their own beliefs, they attack the motives and character of their critics.
• The use of misleading language: Followers of pseudoscience may use scientific-sounding terms to make their ideas sound more convincing. For example, they may use the formal name dihydrogen monoxide to refer to plain old water.

Video

This 3.5-minute video reviews what is considered pseudoscience.
Question after watching: What are some instances of pseudoscience that you have seen or heard recently?

Persistence of Pseudoscience

Despite failing to meet scientific standards, many pseudosciences survive. Some pseudosciences remain very popular with large numbers of believers. A good example is astrology.

Astrology claims to study the movements and relative positions of celestial objects as a means for divining information about human affairs and terrestrial events. Many ancient cultures attached importance to astronomical events, and some developed elaborate systems for predicting terrestrial events from celestial observations. Throughout most of its history in the West, astrology was actually considered a scholarly tradition and was common in academic circles. With the advent of modern Western sciences and the process of scientific inquiry, however, astrology was called into question. It was challenged on both theoretical and experimental grounds. Eventually, astrology was shown to have no scientific validity or explanatory power.

Today, astrology is considered a pseudoscience, yet it continues to have many devotees. Many people know their astrological sign, and some are familiar with the supposed personality traits associated with their "sign". Astrological readings and horoscopes are readily available online and in print media, and a lot of people read them, even if only occasionally. Some believe that astrology is scientific. Studies suggest that the persistent popularity of pseudosciences such as astrology is due to misunderstandings of scientific principles and methodology. Alternatively, some are not convinced by scientific arguments that go against their personal beliefs and this, in the end, can do real harm to themselves or others.

Dangers of Pseudoscience

Belief in astrology is unlikely to cause a person harm, but belief in some other pseudosciences might — especially in healthcare-related areas. Treatments that seem scientific but are not may be ineffective, expensive, and even dangerous to patients. Seeking out pseudoscientific treatments may also delay or preclude patients from seeking scientifically-based medical treatments that have been tested and found safe and effective. In short, following pseudoscience instead of established health care practices may be harmful.

Scientific Hoaxes, Frauds, and Fallacies

Pseudoscience is not the only way that science may be misused. Scientific hoaxes, frauds, and fallacies may misdirect the pursuit of science, put patients at risk, or mislead and confuse the public. An example of each of these misuses of science and its negative effects is described below.

The Vaccine-Autism Fraud

While it is not true, you may have heard that certain vaccines put the health of young children at risk. This persistent idea is not supported by scientific evidence or accepted by the vast majority of experts in the field. It stems largely from an elaborate medical research fraud that was reported in a 1998 article published in the respected British medical journal, The Lancet. The main author of the article was a British physician named Andrew Wakefield. In the article, Wakefield and his colleagues described case histories of only 12 children, most of whom were reported to have developed autism soon after the administration of the MMR (measles, mumps, rubella) vaccine.

There were a whole host of problems with this study, including falsification of research, ethics violations, and experimental design problems. The paper has been retracted (a very big deal in the science community), most of the co-authors have retracted their authorship, and Wakefield lost his medical license. It also later emerged that Wakefield had received research funding from a group of people who were suing vaccine manufacturers. Thousands of follow-up studies have failed to show any association between the MMR vaccine and autism. Unfortunately, by then, the damage had already been done. Parents afraid that their children would develop autism had refrained from having them vaccinated. British MMR vaccination rates fell from nearly 100 percent to 80 percent in the years following the study. The consensus of medical experts today is that Wakefield’s fraud put hundreds of thousands of children at risk because of the lower vaccination rates and also diverted research efforts and funding away from finding the true cause of autism.

Correlation-Causation Fallacy

Many statistical tests used in scientific research calculate correlations between variables. Correlation refers to how closely related two data sets are, which may be a useful starting point for further investigation. Correlation, however, is also one of the most misused types of evidence, primarily because of the logical fallacy that correlation implies causation. In reality, just because two variables are correlated does not necessarily mean that either variable causes the other.

A few simple examples, illustrated by the graphs below, can be used to demonstrate the correlation-causation fallacy. Assume a study found that both per capita consumption of mozzarella cheese and the number of Civil Engineering doctorates awarded are correlated; that is, rates of both events increase together Figure \(\PageIndex{4}\). If correlation really did imply causation, then you could conclude from the second example that the increase in age of Miss America causes an increase in murders of a specific type or vice versa Figure \(\PageIndex{5}\).

Figure \(\PageIndex{4}\) Spurious Correlations [Causation Fallacy] – Consumption of mozzarella cheese and awarded Doctorates

Figure \(\PageIndex{5}\): Spurious Correlations (Causation Fallacy)- Miss America and Murder

Video

Watch this 4-minute video to learn how to spot a misleading graph.
Question after watching: How can graphs present an opinion?

HRT and CHD

An actual example of the correlation-causation fallacy occurred during the latter half of the 20th century. Numerous studies showed that women taking hormone replacement therapy (HRT) to treat menopausal symptoms also had a lower-than-average incidence of coronary heart disease (CHD). This correlation was misinterpreted as evidence that HRT protects women against CHD. Subsequent studies that controlled other factors related to CHD disproved this presumed causal connection. The studies found that women taking HRT were more likely to come from higher socio-economic groups, with better-than-average diets and exercise regimens. Rather than HRT causing lower CHD incidence, these studies concluded that HRT and lower CHD were both effects of higher socio-economic status and related lifestyle factors.

Video

How statistics can be misleading
Question after watching:
What types of motivation could be at play when people or organizations present statistics?

Finally, read through this “Rough Guide to Spotting Bad Science” infographic from Compound Interest:

Figure \(\PageIndex{6}\): A Rough Guide to Spotting Bad Science.

Review

1. Explain why science is more accurately considered a process than a body of knowledge.
2. State three specific examples of human endeavors that are based on scientific knowledge.
3. Jenner used a young boy as a research subject in his smallpox vaccine research. Today, scientists must follow strict guidelines when using human subjects in their research. What unique concerns do you think might arise when human beings are used as research subjects?
4. What gave Jenner the idea to develop a vaccine for smallpox?
5. Why do you think almost a century passed between the development of the first vaccine (for smallpox) and the development of the next vaccine (for cholera)?
6. How does science influence your daily life?

Explore More

bio.libretexts.org/link?16712#Explore_More

Check out this video to learn more about the smallpox vaccine:

Attributions

1. Nurse administers a vaccine by Rhoda Baer for National Cancer Institute, public domain via Wikimedia Commons
2. Child with smallpox by CDC/James Hicks, public domain via Wikimedia Commons
3. Text adapted from Human Biology by CK-12 licensed CC BY-NC 3.0