Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
BMJ 2004;329:859 (9 October), doi:10.1136/bmj.329.7470.859-a
EDITORI write in response to Baum's personal view.1 As a doctor struggling to learn the art of molecular biology (through which doctors and scientists seek to understand illnesses and develop new treatments), I can attest to the huge complexity of the subject. Science is difficult. Science requires great effort on the part of those who wish to understand it.
Because it is so difficult, I fully understand the human temptation to seek understanding of the world's mysteries in a more intuitive, simpler way. Alas, such over-simplifications only reveal mirages. Medical science, like all technologies, relies on the cold analysis of hard data: would we have mobile phones and spaceships if physicists had ignored the facts in front of them?
|
|
Professor Baum
|
In contrast with professional scientists, most of us, the prince and his defenders included, do not have the ability, training, skills, or years of effort fully to understand the complexities of science. Contradiction of scientific research, without the foundation of extensive scientific education is prejudiced folly.
Arrogant are those, whoever they are, who discount the lengthy application of powerful scientific brains, because they are unable to understand the complexities of the subject. Facts are facts, however hard to grasp.
Luke Devey, MRC/RCSEd clinical research training fellow
Tissue Injury and Repair Group, MRC Centre for Inflammation Research, Medical School 6th Floor, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh EH8 9AG devey{at}doctors.org.uk