I don’t think anyone is suggesting a form of blanket slander of scientists or medical researchers is appropriate – if that were true, people would have stopped going to doctors a long time ago.

But there are legacy issues that need to be dealt with – issues from the 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, and 90s that are still fresh in living memories, that relate to the commercialization of research by big pharma, the repurposing of drugs in particular to diversify the revenue stream, the dumping of drugs, devices, and pesticides in undeveloped countries, and a lack of trust in experts that has built up because the era I like to refer to as ‘Father Knows Best’ is finally over. (You can thank the second wave of feminism for that.)

Mistakes have been made – and sanctioned by government. And if scientists were speaking out against the making of these mistakes, I certainly haven’t heard them. The mistakes were huge, whether it was over-enthusiastic promotion and adoption of DDT or millions of women being prescribed hormone replacement therapy they don’t need (or don’t need for 20 years, just one or two, perhaps), the over-enthusiastic promotion of anti-depressants or pain meds by pharma reps – and a doctor shortage in many of the developed countries that has led them to not investigate the research thoroughly enough – or the suppression of negative studies that would have raised the alarm bells a lot sooner. Or just tobacco companies wiggling out of the very real penalties they should face as a result of having done their very best to get two entire generations (of men, anyway) addicted to their product by providing it free during two world wars.

And no, of course it isn’t the role of government (in democracies anyway) to fund and conduct all scientific research. But since government has done a singularly bad job of actually protecting the citizens it purports to represent, people are extremely cynical about the next big thing, and trust can’t be regained in a moment – it’s a long, slow process.

Which is why I think we really need the Ben Goldacres of this world. But we also need a different kind of scientific communications outreach that’s a little calmer, a lot more patient, and a lot more thorough.

As for the media reporting issue – don’t know what to say there. I have been extremely frustrated by some (not all, not even most) media who not only don’t know their science but are intent on pushing only their own agenda, who persist in writing about incidents without talking to the company involved and without actually researching what happened to gain any kind of perspective. In that situation I’ve had to go over their heads to their editors, and even that hasn’t been particularly useful.