Precursory Prevention: Togetherness for Better Health

Contempt for science, bolstered by a multimodal conglomerate of economic, political, and social forces, blurs the distinctions between information, disinformation, and infotainment.4 Expertise, once the by-product of training and skill, is now proffered to influencers who under 'illusions of explanatory depth'5 amass followers through a sea of anecdotes, ad hominem attacks, false equivalencies, and fact shaming of those holding differing points of view. Calling out 'plandemic conspiracies'6 by elites and a malevolent government, these purveyors of outrage inspire doubts on matters they define as too difficult, costly, or inappropriate to resolve. With stunning testimonials about miraculous, unexamined remedies that are inexplicably being withheld from the public, accompanied by screeds on individual liberty, medical freedom, the nanny state, constitutional rights, and natural law, these issue entrepreneurs foment distrust about the severity of health concerns, the efficacy of recommended interventions, and the motives of scientists and governments that advocate for action. All the while, those trusted others within our workplaces, neighborhoods, or family circles who previously were depended on to share perspectives and strategies for daily living have, to a significant extent, been muted by the bombardment of online opinion.Early analyses of science denial highlighted the propensities of individuals to be unwilling to reject contradictory evidence (belief perseverance), selectively embrace supporting data (confirmation bias), avoid discomforting information (cognitive dissonance), and/or prioritize identity over subject matter (reactance). More recent work has emphasized how socially shared in-group identities contribute to animosities regarding out groups. Whenever scientific activities are perceived as undermining personal and/or group identities, distrust and dismissiveness of science are the likely by-products.