tease

Opinion: What part does science play in voting for our next president?

Regardless of political leanings, consider the science in November.

  • By Nils Dihle
  • Wednesday, October 14, 2020 6:30am
  • Opinion

By Nils Dihle

As the November election approaches we are bombarded from different sources trying to influence us on how to vote. These sources have differing political ideologies depending on how conservative or liberal they may be. These ideologies influence the amount of spin put to “facts,” how information is presented and what is discussed or ignored. So, we absorb this information with a “grain of salt” and then consider the source. The farther left or right the source leans, the more conservative or liberal the source tends to be, the more likely we are willing to agree, disagree or file the information away for possible future consideration. This choice of ours, of course, is determined in large part on where we as individuals fall along the political spectrum. This is normal. Some of us identify as Republicans, some as Democrats or some — like me — have not declared a party affiliation. We expect these differences in a democracy and we expect different sources with different agendas will try to influence us on how and who to vote for. This is especially true during a presidential election. This is politics and is not necessarily all bad. We listen, consider the source and then decide according to our beliefs.

This is why I was surprised when two well-respected, established and strictly nonpartisan journals that are science and data based came out with scathing editorials denouncing one of our presidential candidates. These editorials were not based on party lines, were not based on leaning left or right nor were they coming from views associated with conservative or liberal ideologies. They are based on science and data.

The first can be found in the “New England Journal of Medicine” published in early October 2020. This publication is considered the world’s most prestigious medical journal. It is 208 years old. It has never endorsed or condemned a political candidate in all those years. It prides itself on being nonpartisan. All 24 of its editors signed on to the article. This has only happened four other times in all 208 years of existence and those were other editorials relating to medical-type issues. This editorial pointed out that the Trump-led administration rejected science and medical advice by, “Instead of relying on expertise, the administration has turned to uniformed ‘opinion leaders’ and charlatans who obscure the truth and facilitate the promulgation of outright lies.”

The article goes on in clear terms pointing out excessive pandemic-related deaths and other Trump-led administrative failures but can be summed up with one more quote: Speaking of the Trump led administration’s handling of the coronavirus pandemic, “they have taken a crisis and turned it into a tragedy.” While not openly endorsing Joe Biden, the article makes it clear that Donald Trump should no longer lead as president.

The second editorial is in the October 2020 issue of “Scientific American” magazine. The first paragraph starts out emphasizing that in its 175 years of existence the publication has never endorsed a presidential candidate. The next paragraph starts out with this statement, “The evidence and the science show that Donald Trump has badly damaged the U.S. and its people — because he rejects evidence and science.”

In support of this statement the article points out how science and experts have been downplayed or ignored by the the current administration when dealing with their response to the pandemic, with health rules from the Environmental Protection Agency that are endangering the health of people from pollution, with handling (or even acknowledging the existence) of climate change with associated environmental and economic damage and a number of other mishandled areas. The editors then go on to outline some of Joe Biden’s stated plans and approaches to governing that include the important role nonpartisan science, experts and data should have in top-level decision making that effects us, our country and our world. The article ends with this quote, “It’s time to move Trump out and elect Biden, who has a record of following the data and being guided by science.”

Regardless of your political leanings, if you think science should play an important part in a president’s decision making process I hope the above will give you pause for thought in deciding how you vote in November.

Nils Dihle has lived in Juneau with our growing family since 1975. Dihle is a retired teacher and counselor and does not have a political party membership. Columns, My Turns and Letters to the Editor represent the view of the author, not the view of the Juneau Empire. Have something to say? Here’s how to submit a letter to the editor or My Turn .

More in Opinion

Web
Have something to say?

Here’s how to add your voice to the conversation.

After Hurricane Katrina in 2005, many Louisiana homes were rebuilt with the living space on the second story, with garage space below, to try to protect the home from future flooding. (Infrogmation of New Orleans via Wikimedia, CC BY-SA)
Misperceptions stand in way of disaster survivors wanting to rebuild safer, more sustainable homes

As Florida and the Southeast begin recovering from 2024’s destructive hurricanes, many… Continue reading

The F/V Liberty, captained by Trenton Clark, fishes the Pacific near Metlakatla on Aug. 20, 2024. (Ash Adams/The New York Times)
My Turn: Charting a course toward seafood independence for Alaska’s vulnerable food systems

As a commercial fisherman based in Sitka and the executive director of… Continue reading

People watch a broadcast of Former President Donald Trump, the Republican presidential nominee, delivering a speech at Times Square in New York, on Wednesday, Nov. 6, 2024. (Graham Dickie/The New York Times)
Opinion: The Democratic Party’s failure of imagination

Aside from not being a lifelong Republican like Peter Wehner, the sentiment… Continue reading

A steady procession of vehicles and students arrives at Juneau-Douglas High School: Yadaa.at Kalé before the start of the new school year on Thursday, Aug. 15, 2024. (Mark Sabbatini / Juneau Empire file photo)
Opinion: Let’s consider tightening cell phones restrictions in Juneau schools

A recent uptick in student fights on and off campus has Juneau… Continue reading

(Juneau Empire file photo)
Letter: Alaskans are smart, can see the advantages of RCV and open primaries

The League of Women Voters is a nonpartisan organization that neither endorses… Continue reading

(Laurie Craig / Juneau Empire file photo)
10 reasons to put country above party labels in election

Like many of you I grew up during an era when people… Continue reading

(Juneau Empire file photo)
Letters: Vote no on ballot measure 2 for the future of Alaska

The idea that ranked choice voting (RCV) is confusing is a red… Continue reading

A map shows state-by-state results of aggregate polls for U.S. presidential candidates Donald Trump (red) and Kamala Harris (blue), with states too close to call in grey, as of Oct. 29. (Wikimedia Commons map)
Opinion: The silent Republican Party betrayal

On Monday night, Donald Trump reported that two Pennsylvania counties had received… Continue reading

(Clarise Larson / Juneau Empire file photo)
My Turn: Election presents stark contrasts

This election, both at the state and federal level, presents a choice… Continue reading

(Juneau Empire file photo)
Letter: Supporting ranked choice voting is the honest choice

Some folks are really up in arms about the increased freedom afforded… Continue reading

Tongass National Forest. (U.S. Forest Service photo)
My Turn: Why I oppose privatization of the Tongass rainforest

Sen. Lisa Murkowski has been trying to privatize the Tongass for years.… Continue reading