Denying to the Grave

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara E. Gorman ◽  
Jack M. Gorman
Keyword(s):  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Health Science ◽  
Test Cases ◽  
The Public ◽  
Brain Responses ◽  
New Information ◽  
New Concepts ◽  
Neuroscience Research ◽  
Health Related ◽  
Significant Health

Why do some parents refuse to vaccinate their children? Why do some people keep guns at home, despite scientific evidence of risk to their family members? And why do people use antibiotics for illnesses they cannot possibly alleviate? When it comes to health, many people insist that science is wrong, that the evidence is incomplete, and that unidentified hazards lurk everywhere. In Denying to the Grave, Gorman and Gorman, a father-daughter team, explore the psychology of health science denial. Using several examples of such denial as test cases, they propose six key principles that may lead individuals to reject "accepted" health-related wisdom: the charismatic leader; fear of complexity; confirmation bias and the internet; fear of corporate and government conspiracies; causality and filling the ignorance gap; and the nature of risk prediction. The authors argue that the health sciences are especially vulnerable to our innate resistance to integrate new concepts with pre-existing beliefs. This psychological difficulty of incorporating new information is on the cutting edge of neuroscience research, as scientists continue to identify brain responses to new information that reveal deep-seated, innate discomfort with changing our minds. Denying to the Grave explores risk theory and how people make decisions about what is best for them and their loved ones, in an effort to better understand how people think when faced with significant health decisions. This book points the way to a new and important understanding of how science should be conveyed to the public in order to save lives with existing knowledge and technology.

New and emerging environmental hazards and situations

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alec Dobney ◽  
Greg Hodgson
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Health Science ◽  
Health Practitioner ◽  
Health Issues ◽  
The Public ◽  
Environmental Public Health ◽  
Public Health Professionals ◽  
Technological Advances ◽  
Health Related

Environmental public health scientists and health protection practitioners are constantly challenged to respond to new or poorly understood hazards. Practitioners might also be required to address well-characterized hazards that have either increased in magnitude or re-emerged in different situations. Developing technological advances and new and emerging industrial processes (such as fracking, nanotechnology, shale gas, waste fires) can raise difficult questions for the public health practitioner, especially where research and health-related evidence is lacking. In these cases, public health science has a key role in undertaking and communicating risks and in providing the most accurate available scientific evidence and public health advice. The field of environmental public health is crowded with complex problems demanding our attention. It is impossible to devote sufficient clinical, research, and advocacy energies to all of these problems at once. Clinicians, public health professionals, and environmental public health scientists have to choose which health issues take priority.

scholarly journals Humor and Laughter may Influence Health. I. History and Background

2006 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 61-63 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary Payne Bennett ◽  
Cecile A. Lengacher
Keyword(s):  
Scientific Community ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Health Benefits ◽  
Medical Community ◽  
Coping Mechanism ◽  
Professional Literature ◽  
The Public ◽  
Health Related ◽  
Levels Of Support

Articles in both the lay and professional literature have extolled the virtues of humor, many giving the impression that the health benefits of humor are well documented by the scientific and medical community. The concept that humor or laughter can be therapeutic goes back to biblical times and this belief has received varying levels of support from the scientific community at different points in its history. Current research indicates that using humor is well accepted by the public and is frequently used as a coping mechanism. However, the scientific evidence of the benefits of using humor on various health related outcomes still leaves many questions unanswered.

Conflicting Information and Message Competition in Health and Risk Messaging

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebekah H. Nagler ◽  
Susan M. LoRusso
Keyword(s):  
Scientific Discovery ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Experimental Studies ◽  
Public Information ◽  
Adverse Outcomes ◽  
Health Messages ◽  
Health Science ◽  
Public Understanding ◽  
Theoretical Frameworks ◽  
The Public

Clinicians, medical and public health researchers, and communication scholars alike have long been concerned about the effects of conflicting health messages in the broader public information environment. Not only have these messages been referred to in many ways (e.g., “competing,” “contradictory,” “inconsistent,” “mixed,” “divergent”), but they have been conceptualized in distinct ways as well—perhaps because they have been the subject of study across health, science, and political communication domains. Regardless of specific terminology and definitions, the concerns have been consistent throughout: conflicting health messages exist in the broader environment, they are noticed by the public, and they impact public understanding and health behavior. Yet until recently, the scientific evidence base to substantiate these concerns has been remarkably thin. In the past few years, there has been a growing body of rigorous empirical research documenting the prevalence of conflicting health messages in the media environment. There is also increasing evidence that people perceive conflict and controversy about several health topics, including nutrition and cancer screening. Although historically most studies have stopped short of systematically capturing exposure to conflicting health messages—which is the all-important first step in demonstrating effects—there have been some recent efforts here. Taken together, a set of qualitative (focus group) and quantitative (observational survey and experimental) studies, guided by diverse theoretical frameworks, now provides compelling evidence that there are adverse outcomes of exposure to conflicting health information. The origins of such information vary, but understanding epidemiology and the nature of scientific discovery—as well as how science and health news is produced and understood by the public—helps to shed light on how conflicting health messages arise. As evidence of the effects of conflicting messages accumulates, it is important to consider not just the implications of such messages for health and risk communication, but also whether and how we can intervene to address the effects of exposure to message conflict.

scholarly journals Institutional strengthening for evidence-based health policies in the DR Congo (RIPSEC): Impact

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
A Mwembo-Tambwe ◽  
F Chenge ◽  
B Criel
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Health System ◽  
Health Knowledge ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Health Science ◽  
Health Coverage ◽  
District Health ◽  
The Public ◽  
Systems Research

Abstract Issue In the DRC, the need to strengthen the health system for a more equitable charge of the health of the population in a perspective of universal health coverage proves to be relevant. Develop a culture that promotes decision-making based on scientific evidence, essential to improve the overall performance of the health system from this perspective Description of the Problem The RIPSEC program aims to (i) develop the capacity to manage health knowledge in the DRC through the creation of a Health Knowledge Center in the DRC, (CCSC- Asbl); to strengthen the scientific capacity of the Public Health Schools and the National Institute of Biomedical Research in health systems research and education and to strengthen the training capacity of the Public Health Schools by Development of Learning and Research Health Districts (LRHD). We assess the level of achievement of the results of this program. Results The majority of objectives have been reached.The CCSC-Asbl, created is an autonomous institution with legal personality. It produces scientific evidence and support for decision-making. The Ministry of Health has been strengthened and diversified. Institutional capacities and visibility have been strengthened through continuing education and the publication of scientific articles. But, no doctorals theses has been completed yet. Establishment of a consultation framework for health science training institutes: online training, short-term joint training on health system research. The third component concerns the development of LHRD; Transformation processes in the district went through a strengthening of the capacity of the district health teams and via a process of action-research. Lessons The RIPSEC program is increasingly becoming part of the Congolese health system as a strong partner. Key messages This experience can be used elsewhere in different contexts This program could be continued to perpetuate these fragile achievements. It corresponds to the felt needs and the priority of the health education system in the DRC or elsewhere.

International Conference "Ecology. Human. Society"

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Benatov
Keyword(s):  
Educational Process ◽  
Direct Access ◽  
Human Society ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
State Institutions ◽  
The Public ◽  
Market Participants ◽  
New Information ◽  
Training Courses ◽  
Process Element

Our conference is the first project of Student Science Association, which was restored in our University in 1998. The main peculiarity of the conference is the student organizing committee. The conference was attended by representatives of Russia, Belarus, Sweden, Poland, Bulgaria, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Czech Republic, Lithuania, Latvia, Georgia, Iran, not mentioning hundreds of Ukrainian participants. We’re happy with the fact that our conference allows students to discover new information, which they wouldn’t find in training courses manuals; contrariwise businesses and organizations can get direct access to young and qualified staff. We believe that events like our conference are useful for the young scientists and also for the public authorities and businesses. Conference "Ecology. Human. Society "is a part of feedback between universities and market participants. The conference has overgrown limits of being simple educational process element. Today, it is a serious recruiting resource for state institutions and businesses - an important part of a mutually beneficial dialogue.

Trend of Parental Refusal or Delay of Childhood Vaccinations

2016 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Meagan Marie Daoust
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Social Media ◽  
Healthcare System ◽  
Educational Context ◽  
Health Consequences ◽  
Missed Opportunities ◽  
The Public ◽  
Health Related ◽  
Parental Refusal

The healthcare trend of parental refusal or delay of childhood vaccinations will be investigated through a complex Cynefin Framework component in an economic and educational context, allowing patterns to emerge that suggest recommendations of change for the RN role and healthcare system. As a major contributing factor adding complexity to this trend, social media is heavily used for health related knowledge, making it is difficult to determine which information is most trustworthy. Missed opportunities for immunization can result, leading to economic and health consequences for the healthcare system and population. Through analysis of the powerful impact social media has on this evolving trend and public health, an upstream recommendation for RNs to respond with is to utilize reliable social media to the parents’ advantage within practice. The healthcare system should focus on incorporating vaccine-related education into existing programs and classes offered to parents, and implementing new vaccine classes for the public.

Conflicting Health-Related Scientific Evidence in News Reports: Effects of Hedging and Presentation Format on Perceived Issue Uncertainty and Scientists’ and Journalists’ Credibility

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hui Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Health Communication ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
The Other ◽  
Presentation Format ◽  
News Article ◽  
Online Experiment ◽  
News Reports ◽  
Conflicting Evidence ◽  
Health Related

Introduction: This study examined effects of two journalistic practices in reporting conflicting scientific evidence, hedging and presentation format, on scientists’ and journalists’ credibility and issue uncertainty. Methods: An online experiment was conducted using students from a western U.S. university. Hedging was manipulated as reporting methodological limitations versus not reporting the limitations in news articles covering the conflict. Presentation format was manipulated as using a single news article to report both sides of the conflict versus using double articles with one side of the conflict in one article and the other side in the other article. Results: The study found that perceived issue uncertainty was higher in hedged news articles than that in non-hedged articles; presentation format did not affect people’s perceived issue uncertainty. For scientists’ credibility (both competence and trustworthiness), this study found that it was lower in the single-article format than that in the double-article format; for journalists’ credibility, this study found that journalists’ trustworthiness in the two formats did not vary, but their competence was lower in the double-article format than that in the single-article format. Conclusion: This study contributes to the field of science and health communication by examining effects of presentation format used in communicating conflicting health-related scientific evidence and by examining effects of communicating scientific limitations in a context where conflicting evidence exists. Keywords: conflicting scientific evidence, hedging, presentation format, scientists’ credibility, journalists’ credibility

scholarly journals The problems of increasing transparency on uncertainty

2017 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 131-138 ◽  
Author(s):  
Magda Osman ◽  
Amanda J. Heath ◽  
Ragnar Löfstedt
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Disease Prevention ◽  
Prevention And Control ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
European Medicines Agency ◽  
Scientific Process ◽  
The Public ◽  
And Control ◽  
Current Guidelines ◽  
Practical Implications

Public regulators (such as European Food Safety Authority, European Medicines Agency, and European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control) are placing increasing demands on scientists to make uncertainties about their evidence transparent to the public. The stated goal is utilitarian, to inform and empower the public and ensure the accountability of policy and decision-making around the use of scientific evidence. However, it is questionable what constitutes uncertainty around the evidence on any given topic, and, while the goal is laudable, we argue the drive to increase transparency on uncertainty of the scientific process specifically does more harm than good, and may not serve the interests of those intended. While highlighting some of the practical implications of making uncertainties transparent using current guidelines, the aim is to discuss what could be done to make it worthwhile for both public and scientists.

Assessing the Perceived Importance of Skin Cancer: How Question-Order Effects Are Influenced by Issue Involvement

2005 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 398-412 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rajiv N. Rimal ◽  
Kevin Real
Keyword(s):  
Skin Cancer ◽  
Telephone Survey ◽  
Formative Research ◽  
Order Effects ◽  
Contextual Variables ◽  
The Public ◽  
Issue Involvement ◽  
Perceived Importance ◽  
Question Order ◽  
Health Related

Question-order effects refer to systematic differences in responses that can be attributed to the manner in which questions assessing attitudes and cognitions are asked. This article hypothesized that question-order effects in assessing the perceived importance of skin cancer would be moderated by the extent to which people are involved with the issue of skin cancer. A telephone survey ( N = 325) was conducted by administering two versions of the same questionnaire, one in which importance of skin cancer was assessed without other contextual variables and another in which contextual variables were asked before assessing the importance of skin cancer. As hypothesized, when people were highly involved with the issue, question-order effects did not occur. When involvement was low, importance of skin cancer was greater in the absence of contextual questions than in their presence. Findings have implications for how health-related issues are communicated to the public and how formative research is conducted.

Mental Health Ontologies

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Janna Hastings
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Mental Illness ◽  
Public Discourse ◽  
Theoretical Frameworks ◽  
The Public ◽  
Holistic Understanding ◽  
Public Health Challenges ◽  
Health Related ◽  
The Media ◽  
The Way

Mental health presents one of the defining public health challenges of our time. Proponents of different conceptions of what mental illness is wage war for the hearts and minds of patients, practitioners, policy-makers, and the public. Debate and fragmentation around the nature of the entities that feature in the mental health domain divide resources and reduce progress. The way mental health is publicly discussed in the media has tangible effects, in terms of stigma, access to healthcare and resources, and private expectations of recovery. This book explores in detail the sorts of statements that are made about mental health in the media and public reporting of scientific research, grounding them in the wider context of the theoretical frameworks, assumptions and metaphors that they draw from. The author shows how a holistic understanding of the way that different aspects of mental illness are interrelated can be developed from evidence-based interpretation of the latest research findings. She offers some ideas about corrective, integrative approaches to discussing mental health-related matters publicly that may reduce the opposition between conceptualisations while still aiming to reduce stigma, shame and blame. In particular, she emphasises that discourse in the media needs to be anchored to an overview of all the research results across the field and argues that this could be achieved using new technological infrastructures. The author provides an integrative account of what mental health is, together with an improved understanding of the factors driving the persistence of oppositional accounts in the public discourse. The book will be of benefit to researchers, practitioners and students in the domain of mental health.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document