Read on Twitter
Got politely invited to publicly debate hardcore anti-vaxxer. I declined. Some will call this cowardice. Here are my reasons. Thread:'
(1) vaccination science is a matter of facts, not opinion. One can discuss the quality of those facts, but not debate whether they exist.
[1/5]
(1) vaccination science is a matter of facts, not opinion. One can discuss the quality of those facts, but not debate whether they exist.
[1/5]
(2) presenting two positions on a stage gives the impression that they are both valid and equally likely positions. That is not the case here, and I will not contribute to the elevation of a highly improbable platform.
[2/5]
[2/5]
(3) it is highly unlikely that I would change the minds of any intractable anti-vaxxers, and would only increase their visibility. So it's a no-win scenario for me, and a no-lose scenario for them.
[3/5]
[3/5]
(4) Yes, I am conflicted about this philosophically, as I do believe in open intellectual debate, theoretically on any topic. Frankly, I'm just not smart enough to identify and navigate the agendas, psychologies, and huge stakes specifically at play here.
[4/5]
[4/5]
(5) I'm pretty sure it would just increase the amount of online abuse I'd receive.
But if any other scientists have the stomach for this, I salute you.
[5/5]
But if any other scientists have the stomach for this, I salute you.
[5/5]
Annnnnd right on schedule...
