The subtitle—How Politicians Mistake, Misrepresent, and Utterly Mangle Science—explains the book, Not a Scientist*. With today’s headlines, what could be timelier? However, Dave Levitan explains that the final draft of his book was completed before the 2016 presidential election. Since the election, the MO has changed to confronting science and attacking scientists in many agencies directly. Our colleagues are seen as part of the resistance and are thus distrusted. Of course, this has helped drive scientists even further from the Trump administration and the Republican segment of Congress.
Levitan analyzes how politicians have tried to put the most positive spin on science to further their prejudice. He catalogs common behavior patterns that politicians employ when dealing with science. Scenarios include oversimplification, which often leads to “trust me.” Cherry-picking involves seeing only data that support the preconceived idea. Levitan coined the acronym “TOADS”—Those who Oppose Action/Deniers/Skeptics—for climate change deniers. “Butter-up and Undercut” is a more complex pattern, where the politician starts off with laudatory words, then sneaks in a zinger or two that supports reversal of goals. “Blame the Blogger” talks about quoting “alternate facts” that are traced to the web, often to a blog. The quality of blogs varies from negative infinity to right on. “Ridicule and Dismiss” is often used in stump speeches to draw laughs and then dismiss the topic as not worth further discussion. Senator Proxmire took “ridicule and dismiss” a step further with his Golden Fleece Awards.
“The Credit Snatch” is Levitan’s name for a politician taking credit for something that he/she had little or nothing to do with. For example, construction projects take longer than a politician’s term. The successor gets to cut the ribbon, and the dedication plaque usually credits the incumbent and seldom the initiators.
Levitan advises that the behavior patterns of politicians are timeless; only the situation changes. He concludes that our elected officials are indeed not scientists. “Keep that in mind as they try to sneak their not science past you.”
My take-away from the book:
All too often, politicians try to spin science to support their political agenda and prejudices. It is often hard to separate whether the politician actually believes what he or she says or is just mouthing a benign, evasive response. Or, politicians might be just telling their constituents what they want to hear.
The vast majority of scientific work products are really consistency statements or models that derive value from the fact that the results can be repeated, even if absolute proof is lacking. In my experience with nonscientists, explaining the fine points of consistency statements and “correlation does not prove causation” elicits stares of incomprehension.
After reading Levitan’s groupings of political behavior, I came to recognize how difficult it is for politicians to communicate to their constituents on complex topics such as fracking, global warming, vaccines, or abortion rights when neither party has scientific training and lacks a working concept of the philosophy of science. Neither seems to recognize that definitive proofs are seldom achievable. The huge distance usually separating the politician from the primary papers confounds this subtle distinction. Too many times, they spout “alternative facts” that grossly misstate the science. I think this is even more true for the American public.
I recommend this book as good reading for anyone interested in science.
*Levitan, D. Not a Scientist: How Politicians Mistake, Misrepresent, and Utterly Mangle Science. W.W. Norton: New York, NY, Apr 2017; ISBN 978-0-393-35332-7
Robert L. Stevenson, Ph.D., is Editor Emeritus, American Laboratory/Labcompare; e-mail: [email protected].