Tag: science journalism

  • How to prepare for the next pandemic

    This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is maski1.jpg

    The Science and Politics of Covid-19 (Springer, 2021) is one of the first popular science books published on the ongoing pandemic. Combining scientific rigour and journalistic style, the book retraces the history and the management of the pandemic in several countries. It draws upon lessons learned during the crisis, discusses the emergence of “science politics,” and answers the question: why has science failed?

    This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is cover-1.jpg

    Everything we have seen about the Covid-19 outbreak corroborates with Rudolf Virchow, the 19th century father of pathological anatomy when he said that “an epidemic is a social phenomenon with some medical aspects.” The biggest fear since World War II, the coronavirus pandemic highlighted mistakes in government strategies and scientific research. Based on the latest research and interviews with experts from China, France, the United Kingdom, the United States and other countries, this popular science book provides an insider’s view on this major crisis which tells us a lot about the relations between science and society.

    In Short Covid-19 came out of the blue. On January 2, 2020, WHO issued a global alert on the emergence of several cases of “pneumonia of unknown cause” in Wuhan, China. Except in Beijing, most governments did not show any panic and merely set up a daily monitoring of the incubating epidemic. Donald Trump mocked the “Chinese virus” and claimed that “everything is under control.” This story is about a collective failure. Some of the most scientifically advanced countries have the highest Covid-19 mortality. With probably more than 10 million deaths as of today, the new coronavirus caused a rise of 20% in the annual number of deaths worldwide[1].

    Why has Science failed? Although most governments based their Covid-19 strategy on science, scientists failed to have a decisive influence on decision-makers—except in China—, which created genuine “time bombs.” The accelerated development of vaccines does not erase past months’ errors. More worryingly, experts themselves acknowledge that they did not rise to the challenge. Covid-19 also highlighted the weakness of democratic regimes and the power of technocapitalism. The “politics” of science came frontstage during the crisis, unveiling links between the production of science and the private sector, personal struggles among researchers who strive for recognition and authority, and the intermingling of science with politics.

    What Did We Learn? Here are 10 messages and recommendations developed in the book:

    1. Politicians and scientists have a shared responsibility for the mismanagement of the crisis. Many experts acknowledge that they did not rise to the challenge and underestimated the contagiousness of the virus and the dangerousness of the disease
    2. A major political mistake was that countries pulled down their blinds, locked their doors, and promoted national approaches rather than international cooperation
    3. We are not certain that SARS-CoV-2 originated in China as the coronavirus was already circulating in Europe in early December 2019 (at least in France and Italy)
    4. We did not learn the lessons from previous epidemics. Countries that have performed the best are those that implemented non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) as soon as possible. Speed is everything
    5. Mismanagement, miscommunication and incomprehensible delays led to genuine “time bombs.” Prevention of an epidemic does not start when the epidemic starts
    6. Expert committees should not be created “ex nihilo” but attached to the competent administration departments in order to secure decision processes and communication
    7. The crisis accelerated the development of “science politics” at an unprecedented scale, unveiling the links between the production of science and the private sector, the intermingling of science with politics and the political objectives of some experts
    8. The overall mismanagement also reflects the importance of overspecialisation and miscommunication, which has become a way of life in our society
    9. Despite rapid advances on vaccines, the pandemic will not end before several months or years have passed. Herd immunity may never be reached
    10. The resistance to masks and vaccines show that scientific knowledge disseminates slowly. It is now time for political distancing to put the basics first: develop science, fight ignorance.

    Background Covid-19 is the disease created by a new coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, which appeared at the end of 2019. The virus’ genome is contained in a single strand of RNA (ribonucleic acid), which is 29 903 nucleotides long and encodes for just 10 genes, making it the longest known RNA virus genome while being a hundred thousand times smaller than the human genome. The complete sequence was published on January 11, 2020. Human-to-human transmission of SARS-CoV-2 was confirmed on January 11, 2020. As of today, more than 180 million people have been infected by the new coronavirus and probably more than 10 million people (officially) have died from Covid-19.

    Michel Claessens is the author of “The Science and Politics of Covid-19” (Springer, 2021). A scientist and journalist, he works for the European Commission and teaches at the University of Brussels.

    Contact michel_claessens@yahoo.fr, @M_Claessens, +33-6-22887707

    [1] World Health Organization, The top 10 causes of death, 9 December 2020, https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/the-top-10-causes-of-death

  • Pain, just a symptom or a disease on its right?

    By Merce Piqueras

    When I told a friend of mine, who is a nurse, that I was to attend a meeting on pain, she asked me: “Is it an anaesthesiology meeting?” My friend, like other professionals of health, assumes that pain is the province of anaesthesiologists, the specialists whose main task is to prevent pain during and after surgery. However, pain medicine is much more than anaesthesiology; it is a multi-disciplinary, complex branch of medicine. The meeting I attended through EUSJA was the 11th Congress of the European Pain Federation EFIC, which was held in Valencia, Spain on September 4-7 this year, which gathered around 3,500 healthcare professionals from different fields of pain medicine. Pain has been usually considered only a symptom. However, in many pathological conditions in which pain starts as a symptom, it turns into a disease on its right, with its own biology and own biological consequences.

    Pain is a subjective experience that cannot be quantified like temperature and blood pressure. Research has shown that around half of our pain sensitivity is determined by our genetics. At the Allan Edwards Centre for Research on Pain in Montreal, Canada, Luda Diatchenko is investigating the cellular and molecular events that lead to chronic pain. In a recent talk in Valencia, Diatchenko explained how the results of genetic studies are being used to create new drugs for pain management, including personalized pain diagnoses and treatments. Additionally, with a growing body of research supporting its use, many people with chronic pain are turning to marijuana for chronic pain relief as a means of improving their quality of life. To explore more cannabis products for medical and leisure purposes, you may visit the online shop of indacloud.

    The fact that pain is invisible, an emotion, makes it difficult for the physicians to assess the severity of the patient’s condition and the effectivity of treatments. By now, providing evidence of chronic pain at the best walk-in clinic for insurance and legal purposes has been very difficult, if not impossible. Nevertheless, this could change in the near future. At the EFIC Congress, Rolf-Detlef Trede, from the Centre for Biomedicine and Medical Technology of Manheim, Germany, presented a project he leads that aims to identify biomarkers such as proteins and hormones with the capability of objectively measuring pain. These are just two of the many topics discussed at the EFIC Congress.

    The International Association of the Study of Pain (IASP) declared 2019 “Global Year Against Pain in the Most Vulnerable” with the aim to improve the assessment and treatment of pain in the most vulnerable populations: infants and young children, the elderly (including old people suffering dementia), individuals with cognitive impairments (non-dementia related) or psychiatric disorders, and survivors of torture. If you have an elderly relative in an assisted living facility because of dementia, you need to make sure that they are properly taken care of. There are reports of residents being verbally and physically abused. If you suspect that your loved one is being abused in their nursing home, you may need to contact a Milwaukee nursing home abuse lawyer.

    The EFIC Congress took into account the 2019 celebration and various sessions focused on topics related to the most vulnerable populations. Miriam Kunz, co-chair of the 2019 Global Year Against Pain in the Most Vulnerable, has used her advanced understanding of patient’s facial expressions and other non-verbal cues to attract attention towards the usually inadequate treatments of pain in vulnerable patients Communication of pain by patients from these groups tends to be difficult and the health professionals must interpret body language and other non-verbal communication of patients.

    The Societal Impact of Pain (SIP) platform, which was created as a joint initiative of the European Pain Federation EFIC and the pharmaceutical company Grünenthal GmbH, was also present at the Congress. Currently, SIP comprises eight SIP national platforms (Belgium, Finland, France, Ireland, Malta, Netherlands, Portugal Spain), whose representatives presented their experiences and achievements at different sessions.

    In an informal talk with science journalists, Bart Morlion, EFIC past President, highlighted that, in the 2017 Congress, the foundations for a new EFIC direction were laid. They do not want ‘dinosaurs’ leading the organization, and young people can bring fresh ideas such as the increasing use of digital tools. This is why the motto of the 2019 Congress was “Bringing the Future to the Present”. Another change in EFIC, whose core work focuses on education, research and advocacy, is that the Federation has, for the first time, a female President: Brona Fullen, who is also the first non-physician President—she is Associate Professor in the School of Public Health, Physiotherapy and Sports Science of University College Dublin. Morlion described some novelties in the Congress including the active participation of patients and the introduction of new formats of workshops to give room to young talented researchers. Out of modesty, Morlion did not mention what was to be the highlight of the last day of the Congress: the innovative session on antinociceptive cooking led by Morlion himself, assisted by Víctor Mayoral, Secretary of the Spanish Pain Society (and by Miguel, a professional cook, just in case…).

    Brona Fullen evoked David Niv (1950-2007), a former EFIC President (1999-2002) whose patients used to call him the “pain doctor”, and remembered a phrase he had liked: “Few die of pain, but many die of pain, even more live in pain”. In fact, in Europe, more than 150 million people suffer from chronic pain—persistent, episodic o variable—an amount higher than French and German populations together. The clinical and socio-economic impact of chronic pain, which often leads to distress and disability, is of great relevance and it costs the European Union more than 441 billion euros per year. However, in the current EU 8th Framework Programme (FP8/Horizon 2020), pain has been mentioned in one call for proposal on Novel patient-centred approaches for survivorship, palliation and/or end-of-life care, with a funding which does not reach 1% of health research funding in the Horizon 2020. SIP and other organizations involved in the management of pain, have requested to the European Commission, to its member states and to the Civil society that they unite to reduce the impact of pain in the European Union. The Congresses of the  European Pain Federation EFIC provide the right framework for stakeholders to gather and discuss all issues related to pain.

    Photo: Merce Piqueras

    Merce Piqueras is science journalist based in Bacelona. Freelance collaborator of ARA (Catalan newspaper, print and online) and various digital media in Catalan, Spanish and English. Science writer and science journalist mostly on biology and health topics. Author of “Walks around the Scientific World of Barcelona” (Catalan, Spanish and English eds.). Former President of ACCC.

  • AI is changing how newsrooms work: here’s what that will mean for science journalists

     By Mico Tatalovic,                                                                                                                                           Chairman of the Association of British Science Writers

    As artificial intelligence gets ever better and gets applied to all aspects of newsroom work, science journalism will change, too. The nature of our daily work will change and should be prepared for this.

    AI bots already write news, fact check, promote our stories, and assist journalists. Will their advent mean science reporters will become redundant, or will it upgrade how well we can work, making us into even better journalists? Should we fear losing jobs, or should we embrace the promise of this new disruption in media?

    Chairman of the Association of British Science Writers, and a board member of Balkan Network of Science Journalists, Mico Tatalovic, discusses these issues in a new editorial published in the Journal of Science Communication https://jcom.sissa.it/archive/17/01/JCOM_1701_2018_E

    Some of the issues were discussed at the 4th Kavli Symposium on science journalism was held 19-21 February in Austin, Texas. The conversation will continue at UK Conference of Science Journalists, in London, UK, on 16 October 2018.

    Read the JCOM editorial here

     

    About Mico Tatalovic:

    Chairman of the Association of British Science Writers

    Knight Science Journalism fellow at MIT 2017/2018

    Ba (Oxon), MPhil (Cantab), MSc (DIC)

    @MTatalovic

    Image: Shutterstock                                                                                                                                        www.svoboda.org

     

     

  • ABSW Awards 2018

    By Mico Tatalovic,

    Chairman of the ABSW

    “Science writing awards for work published or broadcast in the UK or Irish based media in 2017 open for entry on the 1st of January 2018.

    https://www.absw.org.uk/absw-awards/awards.html

    The Awards are for works of science, technology, engineering or mathematics (STEM) journalism/writing, in print, broadcast or online, published within the UK or Ireland and are intended for British and Irish based journalists and writers or those working for audiences in these two countries. You do NOT need to be an ABSW member to enter.

    The ABSW is also co-ordinating an award for ‘European Science Writer of the Year’ for the fourth year.   This initiative has been made possible by support from Johnson & Johnson Innovation. The award is intended to celebrate the work of a journalist or writer who promotes excellence and creativity in science, engineering, technology and mathematics (STEM) journalism and writing.   They will be recognised for entertaining and informing audiences, for inspiring new generations of journalists and writers, and for innovation in their main area of expertise. The award is limited to those who primarily work with the written word, be it features, news, or blogs, but not books. Their work may appear in print, online or both.

    Each European science journalism/writing association is asked to put forward their nomination for the Award (one nominee per association).  It is entirely up to each association to determine the most appropriate way to select their nominee.

    The nominated writer must have been working in the country of the nominating national European association during the relevant competition year, 1 January 2017 – 31 December 2017.  Supporting articles provided with the nomination must have all been first published during the competition year 1 January 2017 – 31 December 2017.

    The winner of the European Science Writer of the Year Award will receive a cash prize of £600 and will be invited to attend the ABSW Science Writers Awards ceremony to be held in London in May 2018.   Funds are available to cover the costs of attending the conference and ceremony.

    The deadline for making your nomination for the European Science Journalism Association Nominations

    is Wednesday 28 February (midnight) 2018.”

     

    About Mico Tatalovic:

    Chairman of the Association of British Science Writers

    Shortlisted for best section team at British Society of Magazine Editors’ Talent Awards 2017

    Ba (Oxon), MPhil (Cantab), MSc (DIC)

    @MTatalovic

    Photo: Marina Huzvarova, EUSJA study trip to ITER, Cadarache

  • Who’s afraid of science journalists? Portugal’s scientists step into journalists’ shoes

    By Vera Novais, Observador

     The “Who’s afraid of journalists?” session at SciComPT2017 meeting, in Portugal, explored the tricky relationship between journalists, scientists and press officers by having them role play each other’s jobs

    What would happen if you put a scientist into a newsroom, and a journalist into a research lab?

    They might just have lots of fun and learn how to get along better, if a popular role-play session at a recent science communication meeting in Portugal is anything to go by.

    Around 25 of the 200 participants at the SciComPT2017 meeting in Coimbra, Portugal last month (12-13 October) attended the session “Who’s afraid of journalists?” (http://scicom.pt/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Programa-SciComPT-2017.pdf).

    It’s common to hear that there’s a communication problem between journalists and scientists. Most of the time it’s due to a lack of understanding or lack of knowledge of each other’s needs. The best way to solve this might be to put yourself in other people’s shoes.

    “Who’s afraid of journalists?” was a role-play session. Each participant, regardless of their work in real life, was given a task: to perform as a journalist, a scientist or a press officer – and a scenario – from a simple interview to a press conference after a fraud scandal.

    Participants got really involved in their new roles, eventually performing many of the most common stereotypes without even being asked to. After the role play, moderators and other participants discussed the role play, the behaviours and how to overcome some obstacles to communication. Most participants were particularly interested in journalists’ work: for example, how they pick their stories.

    I was moderating this session together with Júlio Borlido Santos, coordinator of the Communication Unit at the research institute I3S (Porto), and Ricardo Pires, scientist at the Centre for Neuroscience and Cell Biology (Coimbra).

    That same day, there was another session that brought together science communicators, press officers and science journalists. It was called: “What’s the role of scientific institutions’ communication offices: from media outlets to outreach, from scientists to society?”.

    Scientists told stories about their experience with the media and how important it is to know what journalists expect from them. The audience was also interested in understanding how science journalists performed their work.

    Both sessions were an indication that we can work together better if only we understand each other better, and such meetings can help foster better understanding.

    Next year’s SciComPT Meeting will take place between the 10th and the 12th of October in Figueira de Castelo Rodrigo, Portugal – Plataforma Ciência Aberta. This is the first centre to be part of the Open Science Centre (http://www.opensciencecentre.org/), with plans to engage local communities with science, technology and innovation.

    Photo: Vera Novais.