Health is a personal experience, a social issue and a global concern. Any attempt to improve health, whether through new treatments, policies or procedures, will be most effective when patients and the public are engaged. No matter how great your idea or how robust your science, it still has to be accepted by the people who stand to benefit from it. Most of the time, that will mean someone putting their trust in healthcare professionals and the science and technologies that underpin modern medicine. Wellcome Global Monitor is the largest study to date into global attitudes to science and
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Simon ChaplinImran KhanHilary LeeversPhilomena GibbonsLara ClementsEthan GreenwoodHannah SkiltonHannah FranklinAndrew RzelpaHania FarhanAndrew DuganPablo Diego-RosellSteve CrabtreeJulie RayPriscilla StandridgeZaac Ritter
In the United States, broad study in an array of different disciplines —arts, humanities, science, mathematics, engineering— as well as an in-depth study within a special area of interest, have been defining characteristics of a higher education. But over time, in-depth study in a major discipline has come to dominate the curricula at many institutions. This evolution of the curriculum has been driven, in part, by increasing specialization in the academic disciplines. There is little doubt that disciplinary specialization has helped produce many of the achievement of the past century
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
David SkortonAshley BearNational Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine
Social media is restructuring the dynamics of science communication processes inside and outside the scientific world. As concerns science communication addressed to the general public, we are witnessing the advent of communication practices that are more similar to public relations than to the traditional processes of the Public Understanding of Science. By analysing the digital communication strategies implemented for the anti-vaccination documentary Vaxxed, the paper illustrates these new communication dynamics, that are both social and computational.
With the rapid development of technologies for exposure monitoring and data analysis, opportunities for utilizing citizen science and community-engaged research approaches in advancing environmental health research are ever increasing. On December 8-9, 2016, the Research Triangle Environmental Health Collaborative (Collaborative) held its 9th Summit, Community Engaged Research and Citizen Science Summit: Advancing Environmental Public Health to Meet the Needs of Our Communities in Research Triangle Park, NC. The timing of this particular Summit was fortuitous as it dovetailed with the
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
Research Triangle Environmental Health CollaborativeMadelyn HuangKimberly Thigpen Tart
Today’s science centers are becoming more aware of changes in their local contexts and are concerned about playing a role in building and contributing to society. The Mechelen Declaration, resulting from the Science Centre World Summit 2014 held in Mechelen, Belgium, clearly expresses this commitment with two of its goals (SCWS, 2014):
1. “We will investigate how to engage even more effectively with local communities and increasingly diverse audiences.”
2. “We will take the lead in developing the best methods for engaging learners and optimizing their education in both formal and
"Strengthening Networks, Sparking Change: Museums and Libraries as Community Catalysts" combines findings from a literature scan and input from the library, museum and community revitalization fields with case studies about the experiences and vision of museums and libraries working to spur change in their communities. It describes the complementary conceptual frameworks of social wellbeing and collective impact and explains how libraries and museums can use these concepts to partner with community-based organizations, government agencies and other cultural or educational organizations. It
The tsunami that took place on 26th December 2004 in the Indian Ocean and hurricane Katrina, that last August struck the Mexican Gulf, are two recent natural events that turned into catastrophes for mankind, causing several thousands victims. One of the reasons behind this can be traced back to the fact that useful information in the hands of scientists and experts did not reach the right people within the right time. A crushing defeat for risk communication was witnessed in these two recent events. All the more paradoxical since we live in what we like to name “the era of communication and
The recent events related to the spread of the influenza virus A (H1N1) have drawn again the attention of science communication experts to old issues, including a couple of issues we deem particularly important: risk communication and the role of scientific journalists in the society of knowledge.
The management of health risks related to scientific and technological innovations has been the focus of a heated debate for a few years now. In some cases, like the campaigns against the use of GMOs in agriculture, this debate has degenerated into a political and social dispute. Even risk analysis studies, which appeared in the 1970s in the fields of nuclear physics and engineering and were later developed by social sciences as well, have given completely different, and at times contradictory, interpretations that, in turn, have given rise to bitter controversies.
The prioritization of neglected diseases in the policy making framework requires heightened advocacy [WHO, 2006]. Mass media positive publicity is among approaches that can be used to achieve this. This paper discusses practical use of mass media to do publicity and advocacy for a neglected disease and its vector. It uniquely presents online links to the analyzed newspaper and television news and opinion articles on tsetse and Trypanosomiasis. The paper shares entry points into mass media advocacy from a lessons learned perspective and notes the importance of understanding how the mass media
After being cosseted by the media for what they incorrectly considered to be a scientific feat, the author found himself widely boycotted by the more “responsible” media. The reason for this was his critical view of the evolution of science, which he felt had become a tool at the service of innovation, and, therefore, of industrial interests. The traditional image of science, which serves to help us to understand the world, still persists despite being perverted by commercial interests, because it is defended by naive people as well as by lobbies, themselves responsible for this debasement