In 1998, after publishing a paper in the British medical journal The Lancet, Dr. Andrew Wakefield launched a public campaign claiming that autism is caused by the measles, mumps and rubella, or MMR, vaccine. Starting in 2004 the Sunday Times revealed Wakefield had manipulated evidence and broken ethical codes, including being paid by lawyers seeking evidence to use against vaccine manufacturers. The Lancet partially retracted Wakefield's paper in 2004 and fully retracted in 2010, saying the journal had been deceived, calling Wakefield's paper "utterly false." Another journal called Wakefield's article "the most damaging medical hoax of the last 100 years."
Wakefield was found guilty of professional misconduct and lost his license to practice medicine in the United Kingdom. Years of further research has confirmed a scientific consensus that the MMR vaccine has no link to autism.
Yet Wakefield's junk-science continues to spawn deadly results. Immunization rates have dropped significantly in Britain and somewhat less in the U.S. Childhood diseases that were once practically eradicated have re-emerged. Wakefield continues to promote his debunked theory, actively speaking and organizing against vaccinations.
Leon Festinger's study "When Prophecy Fails" sheds light on how people often maintain belief in things even after they are proved false: "Suppose an individual believes something with his whole heart; suppose further that he has a commitment to this belief, that he had taken irrevocable actions because of it; finally, suppose he is presented with evidence, unequivocal and undeniable evidence, that his belief is wrong; what will happen? The individual will frequently emerge, not only unshaken, but even more convinced of the truth of his beliefs than ever before. Indeed, he may show new fervor about convincing and converting other people to his view."
That's seems true not only of Andrew Wakefield and the vaccine deniers who follow him, but also it seems true of today's climate change deniers.
Continuing research on climate change is reinforcing the scientific consensus the environment is going through major changes and these changes are significantly influenced by human activity. Whenever people approach the evidence logically and objectively, the unavoidable conclusion is climate change is real and it appears to be influenced by humans. But logic and objectivity is not the last word for many.
Climate change has become an emotionally charged topic and a victim of identity politics. It probably wasn't helpful when Al Gore became the public face of climate change in 2006 with the release of the movie "An Inconvenient Truth." A former Democratic vice president and unsuccessful Democratic presidential candidate, Gore's advocacy made many Republicans allergic to climate change evidence.
What we believe is largely dependent upon our network of relationships and our context. Michael Shermer studies "The Believing Brain." He says, "We form our beliefs for a variety of subjective, personal, emotional, and psychological reasons in the context of environments created by family, friends, colleagues, culture, and society at large; after forming our beliefs we then defend, justify, and rationalize them with a host of intellectual reasons, cogent arguments, and rational explanations. Beliefs come first, explanations for beliefs follow. " The tobacco industry proved anyone can find a few rogue scientists, like Andrew Wakefield, to create bogus explanations for nearly any belief, from the flat earth theory to young earth creationism.
But nature doesn't care what we believe. As weather patterns and temperatures continue changing under the influence of rising greenhouse gases, ice will melt, extreme weather will increase, and the norms for plants and animals will be disrupted around the globe.
The recent Paris accord on climate change is an encouraging development committing every nation on the planet to some responsible action. It is a remarkable event of universal accord and should be welcomed enthusiastically.
As the U.S. finds our way to respond, I want to raise up a Republican: Bob Inglis, a five-time representative from South Carolina, who offers some creative free-enterprise solutions through his Energy and Enterprise Initiative--republicen.org. Inglis notes that coal power plants are responsible for 23,600 premature deaths in the U.S. yearly. He says they are wrongly enjoying a polluting subsidy we all pay for. Inglis proposes a carbon tax offset by corporate and personal tax cuts. A simpler version of his plan would just distribute the tax revenue equally to all citizens. Creative.
We are a can-do nation. We can employ our ingenuity toward solving climate change. But first, we have to believe the evidence.
Commentary on 12/15/2015