Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by cmn32480 on Sunday December 20 2015, @06:02AM   Printer-friendly
from the even-smart-people-can-perpetuate-stupid dept.

False beliefs and wishful thinking about the human experience are common. They are hurting people — and holding back science.

[...] These myths often blossom from a seed of a fact — early detection does save lives for some cancers — and thrive on human desires or anxieties, such as a fear of death. But they can do harm by, for instance, driving people to pursue unnecessary treatment or spend money on unproven products. They can also derail or forestall promising research by distracting scientists or monopolizing funding. And dispelling them is tricky.

Scientists should work to discredit myths, but they also have a responsibility to try to prevent new ones from arising, says Paul Howard-Jones, who studies neuroscience and education at the University of Bristol, UK. "We need to look deeper to understand how they come about in the first place and why they're so prevalent and persistent."

Some dangerous myths get plenty of air time: vaccines cause autism, HIV doesn't cause AIDS. But many others swirl about, too, harming people, sucking up money, muddying the scientific enterprise — or simply getting on scientists' nerves. Here, Nature looks at the origins and repercussions of five myths that refuse to die.

These are some of the science myths that will not die.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Nuke on Sunday December 20 2015, @05:55PM

    by Nuke (3162) on Sunday December 20 2015, @05:55PM (#278956)
    Just because World population is not increasing exactly exponentially does not make the prediction of over-population a myth. I would not expect it to increase exactly exponentially, there are too many complex factors involved. For example the massive improvements in medicine and public health in the last 50-100 years has led to a blip in the increase; OTOH contraception which has had many religious and other cultural barriers to overcome, and has somewhat followed behind the health improvements, has obviously had a more recent slowing influence.

    The facts remain that the population is rapidly increasing, the land area is not increasing, and the resources are rapidly decreasing. It is not a matter of "solving" poverty. Making people less poor actually makes the situation worse as they are able to buy and use up resources more rapidly. And it will not matter how rich you are when there is nothing left to buy.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Insightful=2, Total=2
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4