关于 COVID-19 大流行病数字的争议:知识多样性、科学传播和政治反对。

IF 2.7 2区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Jean-Paul Sarrazin, Carlos F Cáceres
{"title":"关于 COVID-19 大流行病数字的争议:知识多样性、科学传播和政治反对。","authors":"Jean-Paul Sarrazin, Carlos F Cáceres","doi":"10.1111/1467-9566.13833","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The health policies imposed by multiple national governments after the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 were publicly justified by official figures on the deaths that the new virus would have caused and could cause in the future. At the same time, however, groups of people from different countries expressed their scepticism about those figures. Although they were categorised as 'anti-science', 'spreaders of misinformation' or 'conspiracy theorists' in some media, many of those sceptics claimed to be based on scientific evidence. This article qualitatively analyses a sample of the content published by sceptics on their social media between 2020 and 2022. More specifically, it examines the shared documents supposedly coming from the scientific community. We find very diverse content ranging from unsubstantiated assumptions to documents produced by prestigious scientists inviting questions about the fatality rates, the mathematical models anticipating millions of deaths, and the real numbers of people who died from COVID-19. The disputes surrounding the official figures lead us to a reflection about the relationship between, epistemic diversity, the dissemination of science, censorship, and new forms of political opposition. We also touch upon the nature and ethics of scientific controversy in times of a 'war' against 'misinformation'.</p>","PeriodicalId":21685,"journal":{"name":"Sociology of health & illness","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Disputes over the figures of the COVID-19 pandemic: Epistemic diversity, dissemination of science, and political opposition.\",\"authors\":\"Jean-Paul Sarrazin, Carlos F Cáceres\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/1467-9566.13833\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The health policies imposed by multiple national governments after the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 were publicly justified by official figures on the deaths that the new virus would have caused and could cause in the future. At the same time, however, groups of people from different countries expressed their scepticism about those figures. Although they were categorised as 'anti-science', 'spreaders of misinformation' or 'conspiracy theorists' in some media, many of those sceptics claimed to be based on scientific evidence. This article qualitatively analyses a sample of the content published by sceptics on their social media between 2020 and 2022. More specifically, it examines the shared documents supposedly coming from the scientific community. We find very diverse content ranging from unsubstantiated assumptions to documents produced by prestigious scientists inviting questions about the fatality rates, the mathematical models anticipating millions of deaths, and the real numbers of people who died from COVID-19. The disputes surrounding the official figures lead us to a reflection about the relationship between, epistemic diversity, the dissemination of science, censorship, and new forms of political opposition. We also touch upon the nature and ethics of scientific controversy in times of a 'war' against 'misinformation'.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21685,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sociology of health & illness\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sociology of health & illness\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9566.13833\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sociology of health & illness","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9566.13833","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在 SARS-CoV-2 出现后,多个国家的政府都公开表示,它们所实施的卫生政策是合理 的,因为官方数据显示,这种新病毒已经造成了死亡,而且在未来还可能造成死亡。但与此同时,来自不同国家的一些群体却对这些数字表示怀疑。尽管在一些媒体中,他们被归类为 "反科学"、"错误信息传播者 "或 "阴谋论者",但这些怀疑论者中的许多人都声称自己是以科学证据为基础的。本文对 2020 年至 2022 年间怀疑论者在其社交媒体上发布的内容进行了定性分析。更具体地说,文章研究了据称来自科学界的共享文件。我们发现,这些内容五花八门,既有未经证实的假设,也有著名科学家撰写的文件,引人质疑死亡率、预计数百万人死亡的数学模型以及死于 COVID-19 的真实人数。围绕官方数据的争议引发了我们对认识论多样性、科学传播、审查制度和新形式政治反对派之间关系的思考。我们还探讨了在反对 "错误信息 "的 "战争 "时期科学争议的性质和伦理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Disputes over the figures of the COVID-19 pandemic: Epistemic diversity, dissemination of science, and political opposition.

The health policies imposed by multiple national governments after the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 were publicly justified by official figures on the deaths that the new virus would have caused and could cause in the future. At the same time, however, groups of people from different countries expressed their scepticism about those figures. Although they were categorised as 'anti-science', 'spreaders of misinformation' or 'conspiracy theorists' in some media, many of those sceptics claimed to be based on scientific evidence. This article qualitatively analyses a sample of the content published by sceptics on their social media between 2020 and 2022. More specifically, it examines the shared documents supposedly coming from the scientific community. We find very diverse content ranging from unsubstantiated assumptions to documents produced by prestigious scientists inviting questions about the fatality rates, the mathematical models anticipating millions of deaths, and the real numbers of people who died from COVID-19. The disputes surrounding the official figures lead us to a reflection about the relationship between, epistemic diversity, the dissemination of science, censorship, and new forms of political opposition. We also touch upon the nature and ethics of scientific controversy in times of a 'war' against 'misinformation'.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
6.90%
发文量
156
期刊介绍: Sociology of Health & Illness is an international journal which publishes sociological articles on all aspects of health, illness, medicine and health care. We welcome empirical and theoretical contributions in this field.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信