The Importance of Science Communication in Public Health

Science is pretty cool. We can send astronauts to the moon, watch tv on a phone that fits in our pocket or rid the world of smallpox. It makes problems go away so well, it’s as if they no longer exist. That can be a problem in itself.In this episode, I talked to Dr. Rodney Rohde (Doc R) about the role of science communication in public health. To get warmed up, we had a conversation about the state of infectious diseases like rabies and MRSA (Methicillin-resistant Staph aureus).The incidence of rabies is on the way down (Yay, vaccines!) MRSA is on the way up (Yay, antibiotics?). Much of our current life expectancy can be attributed to the development of vaccines and antibiotics in the last century. These two examples show how, in some ways, we can become the victims of our own success and why science communication is still very important for public health.When my daughter was about five years old, she was bitten by a dog at a little league baseball game. The dog was new to the owners who were uncertain of its vaccination status. It was a stressful time considering the possibility of putting Ellie through a painful series of shots to avoid rabies, which might otherwise be fatal. Not subscribed yet? Can we fix that right here?Thanks for listening to the podcast and sharing this post.Fortunately because of our vaccination requirements, getting rabies from a dog bite is very rare in the US. One might assume that’s true elsewhere as well. One would be wrong. This is important information for travelers who might encounter an unvaccinated animal on the beach in another country. There is still a risk of rabies in the US, where the primary carriers are bats. Surprisingly, one can be bitten by a bat and not realize it, reaching into a woodpile, for example. Doc R shared this:And in many of these cases, you can look these up at CDC, there's some unfortunate ones, might have been a child… actually reported being bit by a bat. And the parents weren't aware of this rabies issue and they just kind of moved on. And then two, three weeks later, first symptoms… once symptoms start with rabies, you're pushing 98, 99% fatality. That is an example where science communication can save lives.Antibiotics present another success story that maybe we’ve learned too well. The overuse of antibiotics has led to resistant strains for which there are few or no effective antibiotics anymore. Can’t we just make new antibiotics? Let’s hope so. There are scientific and even economic reasons why that is more of a challenge now - a subject for a different podcast. But chasing the next cure is a never-ending game. This brings me back to the value of science communication.If you want to make an impact and save lives, you could look for the next cure for [fill in the blank]. Or you could help people avoid disease altogether. You might be able to develop a drug that will cure cancer. Maybe. And we should definitely try. But you can absolutely help someone understand and appreciate science. And that might actually save (many) lives someday.We live in a time where it’s easy to take aspects of our health for granted. One can look around and say, “No one dies from “X” anymore, why do we even worry about that?” The answer is “Because it wasn’t always this way and may not stay this way forever.”One might be able to say an antibiotic saved their life. They had a serious infection and the drug made it go away. Few people can say, “This vaccine saved my life.” Because they never got the disease and likely weren’t even exposed to it. But we know lives were saved. A lot of them. It’s just difficult to say whose exactly. Many of us will enjoy the privilege of growing old because of a disease we didn’t get. Thanks to a vaccine. Or an antibiotic. Or now, cell and gene therapy.I had the opportunity to interview Dr. Peter Hotez last fall at The Welch Conference where he spoke about the growing anti-science and anti-scientist movement. Every day on Twitter, people accuse him of being part of some huge conspiracy. I admire him for the example he sets. He calmly points out that all he has done is to create a patent-free Covid vaccine for distribution (nearly 100 million doses) in low-middle income countries. He is never rude or aggressive.Peter has also been a mentor to Rodney Rohde. I asked Doc R about how we can talk about things like vaccines with people who have this extreme level of distrust in science. His suggestion was to engage them and ask questions about why they think the way they do and just listen. You may not change many minds but building trust is important.We’re all on the same team and want to help each other. Let’s assume that much. Learning how to talk about science and have people understand is the first step and the best path is education. If you are considering a career in science or are looking to make a change within science, know that you can make an impact outside of the laboratory. It’s not as sexy as finding a cure for cancer. It’s not CRISPR and cell therapy. It’s the hard work of learning, thinking, writing and speaking. But you can save lives with a pen as easily as with a pipette.I really enjoyed this conversation and I’m pretty sure you will too. You’ll hear what a passionate and engaging science communicator sounds like. Make sure you give this one a listen.SciComm: Bacteria aren’t the only drug-resistant pathogens. A recent article from Doc R. And Thank You to Lemar Ashar for connecting us!Your deepest insights are your best branding. I’d love to help you share them. Chat with me about custom content for your life science brand. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit cclifescience.substack.com