{"id":823,"date":"2009-08-03T12:17:01","date_gmt":"2009-08-03T12:17:01","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/meeseeks:5080\/blog\/?p=823"},"modified":"2009-08-03T12:17:01","modified_gmt":"2009-08-03T12:17:01","slug":"argumentation-in-public-health-policy","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/vukutu.com\/blog\/2009\/08\/argumentation-in-public-health-policy\/","title":{"rendered":"Argumentation in public health policy"},"content":{"rendered":"

While on the subject of public health policy making under conditions of ignorance<\/a>, linguist\u00a0Louise Cummings<\/a> has recently published an interesting article about the logical fallacies used in the UK debate about possible human variants of mad-cow disease just over a decade\u00a0ago (Cummings 2009).\u00a0\u00a0 Two\u00a0fallacies were\u00a0common in the scientific and public debates of the time (italics in orginal):
\nAn Argument from Ignorance:<\/em><\/p>\n

FROM: There is no evidence<\/em> that BSE in cattle causes CJD in humans.
\nCONCLUDE:\u00a0 BSE in cattle does not<\/em> cause CJD in humans.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

An Argument from Analogy:<\/em><\/p>\n

FROM:\u00a0 BSE is similar to scrapie in certain respects.
\nAND: Scrapie has not transmitted to humans.
\nCONCLUDE:\u00a0\u00a0 BSE\u00a0will not transmit to humans.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Cummings argues that such arguments were justified for science policy, since the two presumptive conclusions adopted\u00a0acted to guide the direction and prioritisation of subsequent scientific research efforts.\u00a0 These presumptive conclusions did so despite both being defeasible, and despite, in fact, both being subsequently defeated by the scientific research they invoked.\u00a0\u00a0 This is a very\u00a0interesting viewpoint, with much to commend it as a way to construe (and to reconstrue) the dynamics of scientific epistemology using argumentation.\u00a0 It would be nice to combine such an approach with Marcello Pera’s 3-person model of scientific progress (Pera 1994), the persons being:\u00a0 the Investigator, the Scientific Community, and Nature.
\nSome might be tempted to also believe that these arguments were justified in public health policy terms – for example,\u00a0\u00a0in calming a nervous public over fears regarding possible BSE in humans.\u00a0\u00a0 However, because British public policy makers did in fact do just this<\/a> and because the presumptive conclusions were subsequently defeated (ie, shown to be false), the long-term effect has been to make the great British public extremely suspicious of any similar official pronouncements.\u00a0\u00a0 The rise in parents refusing the triple MMR vaccine for their children is a direct consequence of the false assurances we were given by British health ministers about the safety of eating beef.\u00a0\u00a0 An argumentation-based \u00a0theory of dynamic epistemology in public policy would therefore\u00a0need to include some game theory. \u00a0 There’s also a close connection to be made to the analysis of the effects of propaganda and counter-propaganda (as in George 1959), and of\u00a0intelligence<\/a> and counter-intelligence<\/a>.
\nReferences:<\/em>
\nLouise Cummings [2009]: Emerging infectious diseases: coping with uncertainty<\/a>.\u00a0 Argumentation<\/em>, 23 (2): 171-188.
\nAlexander L. George [1959]: Propaganda Analysis:\u00a0 A Study of Inferences Made from Nazi Propaganda in World War II<\/em>.\u00a0 (Evanston, IL, USA: Row, Peterson and Company).
\nMarcello Pera [1994]: The Discourses of Science<\/em>. (Chicago,\u00a0IL, USA: University of Chicago Press).<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

While on the subject of public health policy making under conditions of ignorance, linguist\u00a0Louise Cummings has recently published an interesting article about the logical fallacies used in the UK debate about possible human variants of mad-cow disease just over a decade\u00a0ago (Cummings 2009).\u00a0\u00a0 Two\u00a0fallacies were\u00a0common in the scientific and public debates of the time (italics […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[7,18,21,23,29,38,74],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-823","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-argumentation","category-consumer-behaviour","category-culture","category-decision-theory","category-game-theory","category-intelligence-and-espionage","category-science","p1","y2009","m08","d03","h12"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/vukutu.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/823","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/vukutu.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/vukutu.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vukutu.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vukutu.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=823"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/vukutu.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/823\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/vukutu.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=823"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vukutu.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=823"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vukutu.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=823"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}