What do you think?
The Deadly Rise of Anti-Science: A Scientist's Warning
Dr. Peter Hotez discusses how an anti-vaccine movement became a dangerous political campaign promoted by elected officials and amplified by news media, causing thousands of American deaths.
During the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, one renowned scientist, in his famous bowtie, appeared daily on major news networks. Dr. Peter J. Hotez often went without sleep, working around the clock to develop a nonprofit COVID-19 vaccine and to keep the public informed. During that time, he was one of the most trusted voices on the pandemic and was even nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize for his selfless work. He also became one of the main targets of anti-science rhetoric that gained traction through conservative news media.
In this eyewitness story of how the anti-vaccine movement grew into a dangerous and prominent anti-science element in American politics, Hotez describes the devastating impacts it has had on Americans' health and lives. As a scientist who has endured antagonism from anti-vaxxers and been at the forefront of both essential scientific discovery and advocacy, Hotez is uniquely qualified to tell this story. By weaving his personal experiences with information on how the anti-vaccine movement became a tool of far-right political figures around the world, Hotez opens readers' eyes to the dangers of anti-science. He explains how anti-science became a major societal and lethal force: In the first years of the pandemic, more than 200,000 unvaccinated Americans needlessly died despite the widespread availability of COVID-19 vaccines. But even as he paints a picture of the world under a shadow of aggressive ignorance, Hotez demonstrates his innate optimism, offering solutions for how to combat science denial and save lives in the process.
During the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, one renowned scientist, in his famous bowtie, appeared daily on major news networks. Dr. Peter J. Hotez often went without sleep, working around the clock to develop a nonprofit COVID-19 vaccine and to keep the public informed. During that time, he was one of the most trusted voices on the pandemic and was even nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize for his selfless work. He also became one of the main targets of anti-science rhetoric that gained traction through conservative news media.
In this eyewitness story of how the anti-vaccine movement grew into a dangerous and prominent anti-science element in American politics, Hotez describes the devastating impacts it has had on Americans' health and lives. As a scientist who has endured antagonism from anti-vaxxers and been at the forefront of both essential scientific discovery and advocacy, Hotez is uniquely qualified to tell this story. By weaving his personal experiences with information on how the anti-vaccine movement became a tool of far-right political figures around the world, Hotez opens readers' eyes to the dangers of anti-science. He explains how anti-science became a major societal and lethal force: In the first years of the pandemic, more than 200,000 unvaccinated Americans needlessly died despite the widespread availability of COVID-19 vaccines. But even as he paints a picture of the world under a shadow of aggressive ignorance, Hotez demonstrates his innate optimism, offering solutions for how to combat science denial and save lives in the process.
240 pages, Hardcover
Published September 19, 2023
About the author
Peter J. Hotez
24 books109 followersPeter J. Hotez is an American scientist, pediatrician, and advocate in the fields of global health, vaccinology, and neglected tropical disease control. He serves as founding dean and chief of the Baylor College of Medicine National School of Tropical Medicine in the Department of pediatrics and holds the Texas Children's Hospital Endowed Chair in Tropical Pediatrics.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 145 reviews
Read
October 11, 2023The COVID-19 pandemic is only the beginning. Anti-science has become a new normal that threatens American democratic principles and our way of life.
I appreciate the effort here and the important work Hotez is doing, both as a scientist and as someone trying to reach across political divides to halt the spread of anti-vax/anti-science conspiracies, but parts of this were really dry and difficult to get through.
I was interested in what the author had to say about the way authoritarian regimes have historically waged war against scientists, and the parallels he draws between the use of misinformation by the modern right (primarily in the US, but not always) and similar campaigns by the Soviet Union and Nazi Party. Other parts of the book were less interesting and felt like a rehash of what left-wing media has been writing about for years now.
Similarly, while I do understand why Hotez was keen to drive home the point that scientists are under attack, his doing so became tediously repetitious.
Want to Read
September 2, 2023It never occurred to me that one day scientists in America would be subjected to politically motivated attacks or treated as public enemies for political gain or Fox News soundbites.
Dr. Peter Hotez: “This aggressive anti-vaccine movement I estimate killed up to 200,000 Americans during the Delta and BA.1 Omicron waves, after vaccines were widely available, because people refused vaccines. They went down this rabbit hole and believed elected members of Congress, the senators, members of the House of Representatives, the far-right podcasters on Fox News, and it killed people.”
https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-far...
Dr. Peter Hotez: “This aggressive anti-vaccine movement I estimate killed up to 200,000 Americans during the Delta and BA.1 Omicron waves, after vaccines were widely available, because people refused vaccines. They went down this rabbit hole and believed elected members of Congress, the senators, members of the House of Representatives, the far-right podcasters on Fox News, and it killed people.”
https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-far...
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
September 25, 2023
Ironically, the ones who gave a one star rating are the very people this book is based on.
Peter Hotez does a wonderful job outlining the history of anti-science rhetoric, how that shaped COVID/current vaccine beliefs, and what we can do moving forward. Albeit harrowing, the information outlined in this book is an incredibly important read for anyone who regularly interacts with the public. It can certainly be dense at times, but that’s to be expected when covering this topic.
If you’re going to waste your time giving books low ratings, the very least you can do is read them first—perhaps you might even learn a thing or two 😉
Peter Hotez does a wonderful job outlining the history of anti-science rhetoric, how that shaped COVID/current vaccine beliefs, and what we can do moving forward. Albeit harrowing, the information outlined in this book is an incredibly important read for anyone who regularly interacts with the public. It can certainly be dense at times, but that’s to be expected when covering this topic.
If you’re going to waste your time giving books low ratings, the very least you can do is read them first—perhaps you might even learn a thing or two 😉
February 15, 2024
As depressing as expected.
A bit repetitive, but there some good data.
My major talking point: Everyone is entitled to conservative views, and in many case even extremist viewpoints, but please do not embrace vaccine refusal or other aspects of health freedom propaganda, because it will only lead to losses of human life.
An estimated 200,000 died unnecessarily because they believed more in their elected officials, Fox News, and the contrarians than they did the scientists.
So many unvaccinated Republican voters died from COVID-19 that John Nolte of the Breitbart far-right news outlet pointed out, “Right now, a countless number of Trump supporters believe they are owning the left by refusing to take a lifesaving vaccine. . . In a country where elections are decide on razor-thin margins, does it not benefit one if their poppets simply drop dead?”
A bit repetitive, but there some good data.
November 22, 2023
Good, but I don’t know why I thought reading this would be a good plan. It made me sad and worried because I already know that this is a huge problem and I try not to think about it 🙃
September 25, 2023
This book sounds an important alarm about the rise of anti-science in the United States and its devastating effects. I admire the author for speaking out against anti-vaxxers and enduring the hate he gets. I would rate this book a 5 for its extremely important message. We need many more books like this one to counter all the disinformation out there! Unfortunately, I did not think the book was written all that well; it repeated itself quite a bit from chapter to chapter and the author dropped too many names and institutes along the way. For the writing, I give the book a 3, hence my overall rating of 4 stars out of 5.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
September 20, 2023
He’s a pathetic excuse for a scientist. And so are most of his works. And so is this one. Despicable!
February 7, 2024
I had really high hopes for this book. I'm not against some of the ideas of this book, however, I had a big issue with how the author comes off. He plays the victim card with a vengeance. The amount of time he spends whining about how hard his life is because some people don't agree with him is downright embarrassing. Mr Hotez, welcome to the real world. If he thinks people on the other end of his beliefs or politics don't get threats and harassed, he is sorely mistaken. I thought that this book would be used for good, a way to help present information in a way that connects with people. Instead he is cruel, aggressive, and judgemental. I recently read a book by a doctor that said that he was taught he needs to build rapport between his patients before educating them. This base level of trust is essential. In large part, what I have garnered from those who are very vaccine hesitant, this is a huge hesitation. They didn't like being forced and when they didn't just follow the crowd and wanted more data or science, they were literally attacked. That is certainly a reason to turn someone more against something. Listen, I'm not anti-vac. My family gets them. But I am empathetic enough to not aggressively tear into someone who thinks differently than me. I would rather try to understand where they are coming from and connect there. And while this drama may have been politicized, it certainly isn't easily cut along political lines. I have many friends on both ends. Almost all of my friends on the conservative side got the vaccine. A few did not, but interestingly, I have more liberal friends that did not than conservative. Unlike the author, I'm not saying my anecdotal experience or opinion speaks for the world, but I do think that the author is a bit too set in his ways to see beyond the horizon. Then he goes on about how those who are apart of the anti Vax movement are antisemitic, while he hammers the South for being awful human beings...ironic given it is heavily populated by another minority group, so that came off extremely racist and unnecessary for me. Call me naive, but I think most people are doing their best with the information they have. Instead of ridiculing them, perhaps you should stop attacking them and listen to them and try to connect where they are. I promise you this type of attitude will never convert anyone to your beliefs. Trying to crucify someone because they think or believe differently than you and create this us versus them mentality is honestly devastating. The way he sometimes talks about people almost sounds like he doesn't feel like they are fellow humans who should be respected too. It doesn't matter if I believe what someone else does or not, I can't even justify that type of behavior. I may not agree with the people he was ridiculing, but I agree even less with his hate filled rants and constant victim card me me me mentality. Sir, you are part of the problem, not the solution. Also, for a doctor, this book is sparse on actual data or proper citations and many assertions that were based on opinions and not facts.
October 14, 2023
I'd give this book five stars just for having Charles Gaba data, among many others, but it then went on to educate me on quite a few points. It has interesting history of how scientists are treated in authoritarian countries and how that has just repeated itself in some countries. Lot of calling out Fox, but only once FL, when they've done much of what he is talking about. He does a decent job of pointing out issues with scientists and communication, but not sure changing that is enough to help at this point.
October 9, 2025
As expected, thoroughly depressing and maddening. I liked learning more about the Soviet regime and their anti-scientist history. I’m not sure how much I learned considering my professional line of work, but I appreciated the pandemic recap as the timeline for the explosion of medical liberty and anti-vax influence has begun to blur. Funny how a bunch of right wing medical liberty folks get their guchies in a bunch over masking or vaccination for the greater good yet somehow also think it is perfectly fine to interfere with people’s body autonomy when it pertains to their reproductive health, gender identity, and sexuality when only that individual is impacted. Rather than any one belief, it’s the inconsistency that is most frustrating. They are only for medical freedom when it suits their agenda.
I do have to say that at times Dr. Hotez comes off as overplaying the victim stance a bit repetitively… though perhaps that tends to happen when you are repeatedly subjected to death threats.
I do have to say that at times Dr. Hotez comes off as overplaying the victim stance a bit repetitively… though perhaps that tends to happen when you are repeatedly subjected to death threats.
January 20, 2024
Dr. Peter Hotez discusses how an antivaccine movement became a dangerous political campaign promoted by elected officials and amplified by news media, causing thousands of American deaths.
Shortlisted for the Non-Obvious Book Awards by the Non-Obvious Company
During the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, one renowned scientist, in his famous bowtie, appeared daily on major news networks such as MSNBC, NPR, the BBC, and others. Dr. Peter J. Hotez often went without sleep, working around the clock to develop a nonprofit COVID-19 vaccine and to keep the public informed. During that time, he was one of the most trusted voices on the pandemic and was even nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize for his selfless work. He also became one of the main targets of anti-science rhetoric that gained traction through conservative news media.
In this eyewitness story of how the anti-vaccine movement grew into a dangerous and prominent anti-science element in American politics, Hotez describes the devastating impacts it has had on Americans' health and lives. As a scientist who has endured antagonism from anti-vaxxers and been at the forefront of both essential scientific discovery and advocacy, Hotez is uniquely qualified to tell this story. By weaving his personal experiences together with information on how the anti-vaccine movement became a tool of far-right political figures around the world, Hotez opens readers' eyes to the dangers of anti-science. He explains how anti-science became a major societal and lethal force: in the first years of the pandemic, more than 200,000 unvaccinated Americans needlessly died despite the widespread availability of COVID-19 vaccines. Even as he paints a picture of the world under a shadow of aggressive ignorance, Hotez demonstrates his innate optimism, offering solutions for how to combat science denial and save lives in the process.
Shortlisted for the Non-Obvious Book Awards by the Non-Obvious Company
During the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, one renowned scientist, in his famous bowtie, appeared daily on major news networks such as MSNBC, NPR, the BBC, and others. Dr. Peter J. Hotez often went without sleep, working around the clock to develop a nonprofit COVID-19 vaccine and to keep the public informed. During that time, he was one of the most trusted voices on the pandemic and was even nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize for his selfless work. He also became one of the main targets of anti-science rhetoric that gained traction through conservative news media.
In this eyewitness story of how the anti-vaccine movement grew into a dangerous and prominent anti-science element in American politics, Hotez describes the devastating impacts it has had on Americans' health and lives. As a scientist who has endured antagonism from anti-vaxxers and been at the forefront of both essential scientific discovery and advocacy, Hotez is uniquely qualified to tell this story. By weaving his personal experiences together with information on how the anti-vaccine movement became a tool of far-right political figures around the world, Hotez opens readers' eyes to the dangers of anti-science. He explains how anti-science became a major societal and lethal force: in the first years of the pandemic, more than 200,000 unvaccinated Americans needlessly died despite the widespread availability of COVID-19 vaccines. Even as he paints a picture of the world under a shadow of aggressive ignorance, Hotez demonstrates his innate optimism, offering solutions for how to combat science denial and save lives in the process.
November 7, 2023
Very heavy on the anti-Covid vaxers and a little bit of information on anti-vax for other vaccines and autism. I really feel for vaccination scientists during Covid (and even now) - it did not sound very easy. Some good information about vaccinations and political opinions though generally lots of information I already knew. I did find the scientist’s perspective interesting as well as his account of his experience during the pandemic and involvement with the widespread supply of Covid vaccines. Not sure if I would recommend but an interesting read for sure!
October 28, 2023
Pura propaganda imperialista!! ¿A quién no le iba a gustar?
Vull aclarir que ni estic en contra de la ciència (ni de les vacunes, que es en que es centrava principalment el llibre). Sóc zero conspiranoica. M'he llegit el llibre perquè pense que l'anticientifisme és un problema xungo. La pena és que el llibre és terrible. Millor dit: BASURA.
Primera: és un currículum glorificat. El problema de l'anticientifisme no l'explica ni l'analitza holisticament. Ni busca causes. Sí que puc assegurar-te que quan acabes el llibre el currículum de l'escriptor (conferéncies amb Bush, candidat a un premi Nòbel) te'l sabràs de pe a pa. Llegint el llibre pensaries que és la persona més important del planeta.
Segona: sabíeu que l'únic país del món són els Estats Units? Si se sent generós i vol aportar una visió un poc més global clavarà la frase de -atenció-: estats units i CANADÀ. UOOOOOOOH.
Tercera: algunes persones deurien de fer-se mirar l'obsessió que tenen amb Rússia, l'URSS i la Xina.
*Contant coses que passen ara al seu país (com atacs als científics)* Just like in the URSS in 1960. Ok? OOOOK? i...? Le dijo la sartén al cazo. De verés.
També: que Putin, Bolsonaro i Orbán, líders autoritaris, van promoure desinformació sobre les vacunes del Covid, van fer callar les veus crítiques, van mentir sobre l'ús de la hidroxicloroquina. Clar, que es podia esperar de països autoritaris i retardats. De Trump, que va fer exactament el mateix, ni 1 paraula, no? VAJA.
Quarta: que pesat en el tema de les vacunes. hi ha ciència més enllà de les vacunes? El canvi climàtic i el seu negacionisme que són? Una broma per a tu? El títol del llibre és publicitat enganyosa. Deuria haver-se dit: las vacunas y yo.
Quinta: a més de tot açò, ha justificat tres o quatre vegades la bomba de Hiroshima/Nagasaki com a una fita necessària i una qüestió que celebrar. I les invasions militars dels EEUU igual: for the greater good.
Com he dit: pura propaganda imperialista. Quin horror de llibre. Odiar als yanquis és un imperatiu moral.
Vull aclarir que ni estic en contra de la ciència (ni de les vacunes, que es en que es centrava principalment el llibre). Sóc zero conspiranoica. M'he llegit el llibre perquè pense que l'anticientifisme és un problema xungo. La pena és que el llibre és terrible. Millor dit: BASURA.
Primera: és un currículum glorificat. El problema de l'anticientifisme no l'explica ni l'analitza holisticament. Ni busca causes. Sí que puc assegurar-te que quan acabes el llibre el currículum de l'escriptor (conferéncies amb Bush, candidat a un premi Nòbel) te'l sabràs de pe a pa. Llegint el llibre pensaries que és la persona més important del planeta.
Segona: sabíeu que l'únic país del món són els Estats Units? Si se sent generós i vol aportar una visió un poc més global clavarà la frase de -atenció-: estats units i CANADÀ. UOOOOOOOH.
Tercera: algunes persones deurien de fer-se mirar l'obsessió que tenen amb Rússia, l'URSS i la Xina.
*Contant coses que passen ara al seu país (com atacs als científics)* Just like in the URSS in 1960. Ok? OOOOK? i...? Le dijo la sartén al cazo. De verés.
També: que Putin, Bolsonaro i Orbán, líders autoritaris, van promoure desinformació sobre les vacunes del Covid, van fer callar les veus crítiques, van mentir sobre l'ús de la hidroxicloroquina. Clar, que es podia esperar de països autoritaris i retardats. De Trump, que va fer exactament el mateix, ni 1 paraula, no? VAJA.
Quarta: que pesat en el tema de les vacunes. hi ha ciència més enllà de les vacunes? El canvi climàtic i el seu negacionisme que són? Una broma per a tu? El títol del llibre és publicitat enganyosa. Deuria haver-se dit: las vacunas y yo.
Quinta: a més de tot açò, ha justificat tres o quatre vegades la bomba de Hiroshima/Nagasaki com a una fita necessària i una qüestió que celebrar. I les invasions militars dels EEUU igual: for the greater good.
Com he dit: pura propaganda imperialista. Quin horror de llibre. Odiar als yanquis és un imperatiu moral.
April 22, 2024
[21 Apr 2024]
A very short and depressing analysis of the alarming rise in anti-science sentiment in the U.S. and the world. Starting with the 200,000 Americans who died of Covid-19 because they refused to get vaccinated.
The author is a well known scientist who helped to create a low cost Covid vaccine for distribution in less affluent countries. He writes pretty well, but often repeats himself. But his passion for the subject comes through clearly.
The first seven chapters were history and description of the current state of things. Most of it was old news. I'd heard it or read about it before. And it was a little dry, with lots of statistics, but no stories. The last two chapters with pleas and proposals for solutions were good, but I think could have been fleshed out somewhat.
Recommended with mild reservations.
A very short and depressing analysis of the alarming rise in anti-science sentiment in the U.S. and the world. Starting with the 200,000 Americans who died of Covid-19 because they refused to get vaccinated.
The author is a well known scientist who helped to create a low cost Covid vaccine for distribution in less affluent countries. He writes pretty well, but often repeats himself. But his passion for the subject comes through clearly.
The first seven chapters were history and description of the current state of things. Most of it was old news. I'd heard it or read about it before. And it was a little dry, with lots of statistics, but no stories. The last two chapters with pleas and proposals for solutions were good, but I think could have been fleshed out somewhat.
Recommended with mild reservations.
August 20, 2026
Quick, punchy, and readable account of the dangerous rise of anti-intellectualism in a polarized political age.
January 24, 2024
A riveting read. Dr. Hotez has been at the frontline of anti-science and anti-vaccine propaganda tsunami that ravaged thousands of lives during the COVID-19 and continues to gather more recruits. This book offers his personal account of the violent threats, bullying, and intimidation that he endured in defending scientists and their work.
The book also provides the reader with a complete chronology of events in the movement, so we get to peer into the ideology and value systems that helped birth this movement. I won't give any spoilers here, but I must say I was surprised at how far back these origins were.
While the book reads like a blow-by-account of how the whole Anti-science movement and its tentacles spread and caused mayhem, it also offers important pointers as to how Science communication needs to be made a top priority by science organizations. Finally, science organizations, science societies, and other NGOs should help scientists fend off legal threats from anti-science forces.
Dr. Hotez has already accomplished a lot by working on several vaccines (especially for poor nations) and advancing the cause of science. Here, he has provided the society and the policymakers with a detailed diagnosis of the anti-science problem as well as the treatment options. It is now our turn to heed his warning.
The book also provides the reader with a complete chronology of events in the movement, so we get to peer into the ideology and value systems that helped birth this movement. I won't give any spoilers here, but I must say I was surprised at how far back these origins were.
While the book reads like a blow-by-account of how the whole Anti-science movement and its tentacles spread and caused mayhem, it also offers important pointers as to how Science communication needs to be made a top priority by science organizations. Finally, science organizations, science societies, and other NGOs should help scientists fend off legal threats from anti-science forces.
Dr. Hotez has already accomplished a lot by working on several vaccines (especially for poor nations) and advancing the cause of science. Here, he has provided the society and the policymakers with a detailed diagnosis of the anti-science problem as well as the treatment options. It is now our turn to heed his warning.
October 7, 2023
Best new book on misinformation about health and medicine. This one zeroes in on COVID-19 misinformation, specifically on the vaccines that reduce your chances of illness, hospitalization or death. Hotez doesn’t spend time rebutting each falsehood in this book- his appearances and articles have done that. Hotez looks at the misinformation as a whole, and shines a light on the people spreading it, and the people funding it. He examines how anti-COVID misinformation has been absorbed by a political party, to the point that even those Republicans who are still fact-based are too afraid of primaries to speak out. (I could say something about how extreme political gerrymandering makes honest politicians vulnerable to crazies, but I won’t)
Great book. Easy to read, and Hotez’s unequivocal support for evidence-based medicine is wonderful in a world of wafflers and “both-sides” rhetoric.
Great book. Easy to read, and Hotez’s unequivocal support for evidence-based medicine is wonderful in a world of wafflers and “both-sides” rhetoric.
January 24, 2024
I have known the author as a fellow scientist for decades and his passion and commitment to help all people is real. You can hear his frustration when anti-science forces make it increasingly difficult for people to lead long and healthy lives. He does a great job of pulling together a compelling case for why we should care about this (we should!), but struggles a bit more with solutions to the growing problem of misinformation and anti-science. I have seen the anti-science efforts scaling up (including by members of Congress) in recent years and share his concerns.
November 26, 2023
Grim and frustrating reading, given the subject matter, however very well articulated and paced to explain the issues and actions that should be adopted to reduce scientific disinformation. The political approach is the focus here but I think the book could also have examined the anti-vaccination and and science lifestyle influencer evolution here too as a notable subset.
December 31, 2023
While a little repetitive and disorganized, this book was generally a good overview of anti-vaccine sentiment and how it affects both society as a whole and scientists personally. Hotez did a good job of examining the political influences but I agree with another reviewer that he completely left out how religion itself can often sway people’s beliefs on the validity of vaccines.
October 21, 2023
This book is is yet another sign of how far our political and scientific literacy have fallen in recent years. It's a bit dry and repetitive at times, but we need Dr. Hotez and others like him to keep speaking out fearlessly lest we lose all sense of reason and logic in our society.
September 18, 2026
This book was for the most part really interesting,
I do think it was an odd call to publish it when he did, like obviously things need to be said in a timely manner and these ideas were important but it already feels a bit out of date in places, especially when speculating on the then upcoming election or other near future events
I think the dedication to political neutrality or to not seeming like he is attacking people gets a bit frustrating at times. I understand why he has these ideas and I don't hold it against him especially given his job involving politics, news, and other people to make nice with.
If the argument is that the anti science of today is similar to that expressed by authoritarian groups of the past, that it is in some way used as a tool in elections or supports a political purpose, then you cannot easily disentangle that anti science from the politics.
"You can believe whatever you want politically but please don't kill people with vaccine misinformation" seems like a friendly foot in the door way to address the more immediate problem but I think it fails to accept the fact that there are people doing misinformation on purpose. Shredding faith in institutions is a political goal.
I think the author still thinks of politics as like an argument about tax increases and municipal laws, rather than an argument about the nature of power and the role of the government that pervades all aspects of society and life. "Vaccines should not be political" but they literally always have been. Even if it was less hotly debated or less discussed at the time any system making a choice about the health of a population is political, and I don't think it helps to pretend it isn't.
I think the author would benefit from conversations with people who have spent more time arguing against the alt right online from prior to 2020. There are multiple moments in this book that discuss doxing, targeted harassment, or similar tactics as though they are brand new.
I know that argument that it means to make is two fold. One being that while this may have happened to climate scientists and others in the past, it being applied to biologists is relatively new. The other being that the author is personally upset and frightened by these and is worried about how that will effect young scientists.
However, the type of harassment the author is facing feels very similar to that described by a lot of science communicators and political activists online.
There are a surprisingly high number of moments in this book where the author shows emails he received in order to shock and upset the audience. These moments are shocking and upsetting, but they are also just kind of what that kind of harassment looks like.
I don't want to minimize what the author is going through, but I think its worth noting that other have gone through and survived it as well, and they might have something to add to the conversation.
I think given the title and the context of the book this would have benefited from a bit more discussion of how these strategies have been used in the past. Like despite being about the "rise of anti-science" this book doesn't really talk about much beyond COVID-19, when I think there is a bit more of a history there that could have been discussed.
Despite the fact I had a fair few criticisms I still found this book very interesting. The discussion of the authors role as a science communicator and the empathy he has for the real damage done by the anti vax movement is really interesting.
I do think it was an odd call to publish it when he did, like obviously things need to be said in a timely manner and these ideas were important but it already feels a bit out of date in places, especially when speculating on the then upcoming election or other near future events
I think the dedication to political neutrality or to not seeming like he is attacking people gets a bit frustrating at times. I understand why he has these ideas and I don't hold it against him especially given his job involving politics, news, and other people to make nice with.
If the argument is that the anti science of today is similar to that expressed by authoritarian groups of the past, that it is in some way used as a tool in elections or supports a political purpose, then you cannot easily disentangle that anti science from the politics.
"You can believe whatever you want politically but please don't kill people with vaccine misinformation" seems like a friendly foot in the door way to address the more immediate problem but I think it fails to accept the fact that there are people doing misinformation on purpose. Shredding faith in institutions is a political goal.
I think the author still thinks of politics as like an argument about tax increases and municipal laws, rather than an argument about the nature of power and the role of the government that pervades all aspects of society and life. "Vaccines should not be political" but they literally always have been. Even if it was less hotly debated or less discussed at the time any system making a choice about the health of a population is political, and I don't think it helps to pretend it isn't.
I think the author would benefit from conversations with people who have spent more time arguing against the alt right online from prior to 2020. There are multiple moments in this book that discuss doxing, targeted harassment, or similar tactics as though they are brand new.
I know that argument that it means to make is two fold. One being that while this may have happened to climate scientists and others in the past, it being applied to biologists is relatively new. The other being that the author is personally upset and frightened by these and is worried about how that will effect young scientists.
However, the type of harassment the author is facing feels very similar to that described by a lot of science communicators and political activists online.
There are a surprisingly high number of moments in this book where the author shows emails he received in order to shock and upset the audience. These moments are shocking and upsetting, but they are also just kind of what that kind of harassment looks like.
I don't want to minimize what the author is going through, but I think its worth noting that other have gone through and survived it as well, and they might have something to add to the conversation.
I think given the title and the context of the book this would have benefited from a bit more discussion of how these strategies have been used in the past. Like despite being about the "rise of anti-science" this book doesn't really talk about much beyond COVID-19, when I think there is a bit more of a history there that could have been discussed.
Despite the fact I had a fair few criticisms I still found this book very interesting. The discussion of the authors role as a science communicator and the empathy he has for the real damage done by the anti vax movement is really interesting.
September 14, 2026
4.5 stars.
Recently, I’ve had a lot of friends who are having kids tell me, “I don’t know if I’m going to vaccinate my child.” And honestly, that’s baffling to me. I struggle to understand why you wouldn’t.
But I also have to remember that, during COVID-19, I fell into a lot of anti-vaccine propaganda myself. I’m not proud of it, and I have since completely changed my stance. I allowed the people around me to influence my choices, and the media I was consuming fed into the anxiety my OCD was already amplifying.
When I eventually changed my opinions after taking the time to actually research them, I assumed I had been in the minority. I did end up getting my COVID-19 vaccine, even though I was still afraid.
One thing I’ve taken away from this experience is that changing your opinion is an important part of personal growth. Listening to educated voices and being willing to reconsider what you believe is incredibly important as a society. And it should go without saying that it is never okay to send death threats or put other people at risk simply because you want your own narrative to be supported.
I think some of the people I know who have told me they’re considering not vaccinating their children felt safe telling me because they didn’t know my views had changed. I was very loudly on the other side when I believed those things. Then, quietly, I crossed the bridge.
That’s part of why I think this is such an important book. It takes something you might initially see as a minuscule personal opinion and zooms out to show you the consequences that those opinions can have when they become widespread.
I think there’s value in being willing to admit, I was wrong. I certainly had to learn how to do that.
Recently, I’ve had a lot of friends who are having kids tell me, “I don’t know if I’m going to vaccinate my child.” And honestly, that’s baffling to me. I struggle to understand why you wouldn’t.
But I also have to remember that, during COVID-19, I fell into a lot of anti-vaccine propaganda myself. I’m not proud of it, and I have since completely changed my stance. I allowed the people around me to influence my choices, and the media I was consuming fed into the anxiety my OCD was already amplifying.
When I eventually changed my opinions after taking the time to actually research them, I assumed I had been in the minority. I did end up getting my COVID-19 vaccine, even though I was still afraid.
One thing I’ve taken away from this experience is that changing your opinion is an important part of personal growth. Listening to educated voices and being willing to reconsider what you believe is incredibly important as a society. And it should go without saying that it is never okay to send death threats or put other people at risk simply because you want your own narrative to be supported.
I think some of the people I know who have told me they’re considering not vaccinating their children felt safe telling me because they didn’t know my views had changed. I was very loudly on the other side when I believed those things. Then, quietly, I crossed the bridge.
That’s part of why I think this is such an important book. It takes something you might initially see as a minuscule personal opinion and zooms out to show you the consequences that those opinions can have when they become widespread.
I think there’s value in being willing to admit, I was wrong. I certainly had to learn how to do that.
February 7, 2025
There are many things to say about this book. I empathize with hotez for the threats he has received simply for doing his job. I think he is a great advocate for science and other scientists. I also agree that we cannot hide within the ivory tower and must engage with the public to prevent anti-science sentiment. However, I think it is still unclear what the next steps are and hotez only provides general ideas at best of how to engage with anti science. I’m eager to follow him more as our landscape for public health is rapidly changing (mostly for the worse). Otherwise, a needed call to action
March 20, 2025
A fantastic and eye opening read to the horrors of the anti-science movement. This is a tragically widespread issue that has stalled many great works and steps forward in science and as a people. The anti-vaccination, anti-science movement and defamatory and inflammatory rhetoric being expelled by extremists has plunged our entire society into a health crisis labeled as impending on freedoms. Science and scientific opinions often change, but today science is always looking towards the best interest of the world. Science is complicated but more often than not it is more right than wrong. Peter Hotez does a phenomenal job explaining and articulating the history, current events, and future of science in a rapidly growing anti-science worldview.
July 31, 2026
In your mind, picture a friendly, mad scientist. That super nerdy kid growing up who had a telescope at 8 years old. Who asked for a microscope for his 10th birthday. Bigggg Magic the card game guy. Now, follow him 30 years later and you find out that kid is a physician scientist named Peter Hotez MD, PhD. That awkward kid who wore a bow tie to 5th grade graduation party grew up to create a cheap, lifesaving COVID vaccine that saved millions of children's lives. Who would be an expert on how vaccines don't cause autism? Dr. Hotez. So much so, he wrote a book called, "Vaccine Did Not Cause Rachel's Autism", about his OWN daughter named Rachel WHO HAS AUTISM. In healthcare, we are told to stay neutral; to stay on the sidelines; to have no opinion; to never be involved in politics, no matter what. Except there are consequences of inaction. The academies and professional organizations have stayed silent during the last 10 years (especially during and since COVID) for fear of not respecting people's healthcare autonomy. Because of this hesitancy, fear and doubt, misinformation and conspiracy theories have proliferated. This direct inaction has cost the lives of millions of Americans. ~208,000 people unnecessarily died from covid when a vaccine was readily available. 200,000 excess deaths. Ironically, the reddest states with the strongest opposition to covid vaccines saw the most amount of their citizens die. It would be hard for your citizens to vote for your policies when they're dead (and don't get me started about deceased register voter bullshit conspiracy). Dr. Hotez believes and demonstrates his willingness to have an opinion, to be a voice of reason, to stand with all those scientists and nerds out there who are too scared to say anything. As Dr. Hotez states throughout the book: you can have your conservative beliefs. You can even have your far-right extremist beliefs. But separate that from science. Innocent people's lives are on the line. Dr. Hotez is widely respected in medicine and public health, nationally and around the world. As I have always said, "leave the nerds alone. They just want to be left alone anyway." Nerds rule the world
August 1, 2024
Hotez shares his personal experience of being on the forfont of anti-science movements in the US. His involvement with Autism, vaccines, and Covid put him in the crosshairs of several groups and he has chosen not to be silent about his experience despite mounting threats to his (and his family's) safety.
An important read, but I feel like this is just scratching the surface of the "contrarian" anti-science movement that is now peaking in the United States.
An important read, but I feel like this is just scratching the surface of the "contrarian" anti-science movement that is now peaking in the United States.
April 20, 2024
Interesting, but became a bit repetitive.
October 20, 2023
My Unmentionables
This is an example of a book review that cannot posted on Amazon. It will be interesting to see how long it will last here. My critique as follows notwithstanding, I still admire Dr. Hotez (and Dr. Fauci) and strongly recommend this book. It is non-technical and easily readable.
The Unmentionable Source of the Anti-Science:
In a word, Christianity. Throughout the books first seven chapters, Dr. Hotez says it in every other possible way, but he never calls out the true source of willful ignorance, conspiracy theories and disinformation which is Christian fundamentalist true belief and Bible literalism. These people are constantly mislabeled as conservatives, Republicans, uneducated, anti-intellectual, rural, right-wing, and Trump supports. Religious beliefs are mislabeled as ‘core values’. It is true that most fundamentalist and evangelical Christians are conservatives and/or Republicans, uneducated, anti-intellectual, rural, right-wing, and Trump supporters, but it is the Christianity which is the common underlying factor for these groups as well as the primary source of willful ignorance, not the conservativism or Republicanism as odious as those can be in many other respects. Dr. Hotez points out how anti-science runs along a partisan divide but is reticent to mention that it also runs along a religious divide. It is only and finally in the last chapter that Dr. Hotez at least acknowledges the problems in “Afghanistan and Pakistan – both Muslim-majority nations” and with “Orthodox Jewish groups in New York” as well as “some Evangelical Christian groups” generally being anti-science. He classifies religion as an additional driver of anti-science alongside of politics, as a secondary driver or as almost an afterthought, whereas I see it as the fundamental driver upon which politics and social attitudes are derivative. The religious groups are not merely allied with the political extremists as Dr. Hotez tells us, the religious groups are the drivers of the political extremists in my opinion. For example, the overturning of the rights and protections provided by Roe v Wade, the teaching of creationism, and the anti-LGBQT crusade are comorbidities of religion which fit in well with the aggressive religious anti-science agenda.
Dr. Hotez has found it difficult to uncouple anti-science from political extremism. I have found it difficult, if not impossible, to uncouple anti-science from religious extremism. This is because the religious beliefs provide the basis for the political beliefs. Maybe Dr. Hotez feels that he cannot call out Christian fundamentalists and Bible literalists more fully or explicitly because he is Jewish and would appear to be bigoted against Christians. Or possibly, Dr. Hotez, as a working scientist and academic, trying to positively raise awareness of the benefits of modern medicine and evidenced based science, feels he will alienate a vast portion of the public he is trying to reach and bring undue criticism upon the institutions with which he is associated. I of course have no such concerns. A person who can believe in God can believe anything no matter how absurd because there is nothing more absurd than evidence free religious belief, especially in Christianly and Islam but Christianity is the fundamental source of the anti-science aggression in the U.S. As Dr. Hotez even admits, he receives most of his threatening emails messages and Tweets on Sunday. Just a coincidence? Perhaps. But Sunday is also the Christian holy day so what better day than Sunday to launch into a holy crusade against a Jewish doctor/scientist trying to work for the benefit of humanity? Evidence that religious belief plays a pivotal role in vaccine acceptance and rejection rates is documented by Dr. Hotez in the fact that Covid vaccine acceptance greatly improved in the African-American community only after Black pastors became involved and started prompting the vaccine from the pulpit. The same is true in reverse for white fundamentalist preachers. Also, as with all religious fundamentalism, this is not just a uniquely American or national problem. Slowing, impeding and halting scientific progress is a hallmark of religious fundamentalism worldwide and throughout recorded history. At risk now is medical research in other cutting-edge areas of medicine such as gene editing, stem cell, and neuroscience etc. Knowledge, progress, science and advancement (scientific or social) is dangerous to fundamental religious beliefs. Religious believers have a natural resentment against that which their beliefs cannot explain. Ironically, Dr. Hotez says “…it is impossible to talk about it without talking about it…” by this he means the politics, which is difficult enough, not the religion, which is nearly impossible.
When there is freedom of religion all freedoms are in danger. Of course, there is also fetish conservatism, far right extremism, and exaggerated libertarianism, all magnified by the dysfunction in the U.S. political system, but Christian fundamentalism and Bible literalism is the common source for all these fact free bigots. Dr. Hotez identifies the anti-science politics as strongest in Texas and the southern U.S. states without ever pointing out that this is the Bible Belt. He refers to “something terrible” which “has happened to broaden and intensify public rejection of vaccines and other biomedical innovations in the United States…” this is Christian fundamentalism and evangelicalism with Bible literalism, but this is my inference not the author’s. I believe the anti-science feature of far-right authoritarianism comes from religious fundamentalism. Anti-science leaders, groups and individuals employ threats and bullying tactics just as Christians do and as I have experienced first-hand. Dr. Hotez speaks about how the CDC and DHHS are reluctant to challenge the anti-vaccine movement. I believe this is the case because it is a fundamentally religious (Christian) movement, and government agencies do not want to be seen as offending religious beliefs even though those religious beliefs are themselves offensive to reason and dangerous to health. The agencies seem to think that pushback would only empower the anti-vaccine movement which only means they misunderstand it; it is a religious calling.
The fundamental troubling driver (religious beliefs) of anti-science aggression is also a method of forming cultural values, social attitudes, a way of life, a source of identity and a sense of community. In such cases, with such stakes, no compromise is possible. This is why anti-science aggression will not end. The epidemic of anti-science aggression may prove to be more lethal than any natural pandemic. The new brand of muscular Christianity is also very authoritarian and anti-science aggression has always been a feature of authoritarian regimes. I do like how Dr. Hotez connects the dots between anti-science ignorance with other conspiracy theories, QAnon, anti-Semitism, white supremacy as well as Russian disinformation efforts and other far right extremist views in politics. I just wish he would have made the final connection to Bible belief, fundamentalist Christianity and evangelicalism which is the belief system providing the ultimate and underlying metaphysical justification to be anti-science. It is not just an ancillary cause among many. This is why it will be nearly impossible to combat, it is tied to religion which distorts rational thinking and natural moral sensibilities.
Misunderstanding Freedom and Rights:
Dr. Hotez does not explain it in this way, but I would not him expect to do so, he is a doctor, not a philosopher or political scientist.
Two basic Concepts of Personal Rights
Individual Liberty: When individual rights are based upon an atomistic existence and a purely individualist view of human experience, or personal religious salvation and deliverance, the derivative rights which follow are thought of as purely singular personal rights. This is framed as personal choice, health freedom or medical freedom. Any other conception of rights other than as individual rights becomes unthinkable and falls outside of reality itself and is well, un-American which is worse. Ironically, this becomes the freedom to engage in medical quackery, but this is beside the point. The dark side of this individualist view is that one obtains the right to put the health and lives of other people at risk with the individual right to make a personal choice not to get vaccinated. This is framed as the libertarian right of “vaccine choice”.
Social Solidarity: Alternatively, personal rights derived from social soldiery or based on social bonds requiring each person who can do so, receive a vaccination. This at first seems contrary to personal rights but actually enhances the liberty of every individual by allowing them to engage with other people and participate in social life risk free or with much reduced risk and less fear. The freedom of individuals to move about and congregate is restored with a vaccine mandate. There is no longer a contradiction between individual liberty and social solidarity. There is a false belief that the requirements of human society are constraining on the individual but in truth, social solidarity is empowering. Deontic powers such as rights, duties, obligations thus arise. This is what holds human society together. In terms of personal rights, we must remember that given the organic nature and interlocking network that is human society, there is little if any action which we can take as individuals that does not affect someone else. Individual liberty only has value within a social structure which by definition limits individual liberty. The only way to grow and flourish as an individual is from the roots of social embeddedness. The alternative is chaos and anarchy as we see being played out in real time at the writing of this review.
Rethinking Illness:
My Synthesis: The individualist conception of rights results in mis-framing a public health issue as a personal rights issue. A pandemic is by definition a collective, not an individual problem. It requires thinking of illness in a different manner, as a community malady and not simply as the sickness of an individual. It requires a change in perspective. Disease is more effectively prevented by thinking of it in terms of containment and transmission rather than as simply an individual illness to be treated. Understanding the macro trends in disease and mortality patterns is the most effective way of keeping individuals healthy rather than simply treating diseases in individuals. For example, cholera was halted in the nineteenth century with an updated sewer system (a public investment), not improved medical care. Another example is refrigeration to eliminate the health hazards caused by spoilage. Simply stated, diseases such as Covid are more easily prevented than treated but this is still not understood by the anti-expert, anti-science, anti-vax, anti-intellectual public. Rights based purely on individualism creates a well-crafted but false narrative. Thinking in terms of community benefits instead of personal rights is an alien way of thinking for many people and not even possible in a completely individualistic or atomistic rights paradigm based on personal salvation.
Ironically, with the weakening and collapse of so many external social structures of authority and institutions, many of the moral and ethical constraints upon individuals are now seen as intolerable and unjustified. External social structures of authority have been replaced by the internal subjective authority of the ‘self’ and this reinforces the anti-science mindset about which Dr. Hotez so eloquently and effectively writes and warns.
An Odd and Troubling Reference turns Ironic
P. 3, To wit: “Scientists shaped our nation’s destiny through a successful Manhattan Project to defeat fascism in World War II.” This gave me pause. First, WWII fascism is usually taken to mean Nazi Germany. It is true that the Manhattan Project was inaugurated to beat the Germans in the race to develop the atomic bomb, but Germany was defeated without the use of the atomic bomb and without regard to the Manhattan Project. The atomic bomb was used, and I would argue needlessly, against Japan. Given that it was used against civilian population centers with hideously cruel and horrific results which included long-term health effects, illness and cancer for several generations, I find it odd that a medical doctor and scientist with the ethics and moral compass of Dr. Hotez, with his dedication to saving lives and improving health, would offer the Manhattan Project as a proud accomplishment of modern science. If anything, the atomic bomb demonstrates the dark side of science and of how scientific advances can be misused to destroy life and health on a hitherto unmanageable scale with unprecedented horror. With this, science became less certain and certainly no longer a certain force for human progress given the use of the atomic bomb to massacre people at an unprecedented level of horrifying cruelty and modern efficiency. Ironically, this vaulted scientific achievement might be part of the current anti-science mindset.
This is an example of a book review that cannot posted on Amazon. It will be interesting to see how long it will last here. My critique as follows notwithstanding, I still admire Dr. Hotez (and Dr. Fauci) and strongly recommend this book. It is non-technical and easily readable.
The Unmentionable Source of the Anti-Science:
In a word, Christianity. Throughout the books first seven chapters, Dr. Hotez says it in every other possible way, but he never calls out the true source of willful ignorance, conspiracy theories and disinformation which is Christian fundamentalist true belief and Bible literalism. These people are constantly mislabeled as conservatives, Republicans, uneducated, anti-intellectual, rural, right-wing, and Trump supports. Religious beliefs are mislabeled as ‘core values’. It is true that most fundamentalist and evangelical Christians are conservatives and/or Republicans, uneducated, anti-intellectual, rural, right-wing, and Trump supporters, but it is the Christianity which is the common underlying factor for these groups as well as the primary source of willful ignorance, not the conservativism or Republicanism as odious as those can be in many other respects. Dr. Hotez points out how anti-science runs along a partisan divide but is reticent to mention that it also runs along a religious divide. It is only and finally in the last chapter that Dr. Hotez at least acknowledges the problems in “Afghanistan and Pakistan – both Muslim-majority nations” and with “Orthodox Jewish groups in New York” as well as “some Evangelical Christian groups” generally being anti-science. He classifies religion as an additional driver of anti-science alongside of politics, as a secondary driver or as almost an afterthought, whereas I see it as the fundamental driver upon which politics and social attitudes are derivative. The religious groups are not merely allied with the political extremists as Dr. Hotez tells us, the religious groups are the drivers of the political extremists in my opinion. For example, the overturning of the rights and protections provided by Roe v Wade, the teaching of creationism, and the anti-LGBQT crusade are comorbidities of religion which fit in well with the aggressive religious anti-science agenda.
Dr. Hotez has found it difficult to uncouple anti-science from political extremism. I have found it difficult, if not impossible, to uncouple anti-science from religious extremism. This is because the religious beliefs provide the basis for the political beliefs. Maybe Dr. Hotez feels that he cannot call out Christian fundamentalists and Bible literalists more fully or explicitly because he is Jewish and would appear to be bigoted against Christians. Or possibly, Dr. Hotez, as a working scientist and academic, trying to positively raise awareness of the benefits of modern medicine and evidenced based science, feels he will alienate a vast portion of the public he is trying to reach and bring undue criticism upon the institutions with which he is associated. I of course have no such concerns. A person who can believe in God can believe anything no matter how absurd because there is nothing more absurd than evidence free religious belief, especially in Christianly and Islam but Christianity is the fundamental source of the anti-science aggression in the U.S. As Dr. Hotez even admits, he receives most of his threatening emails messages and Tweets on Sunday. Just a coincidence? Perhaps. But Sunday is also the Christian holy day so what better day than Sunday to launch into a holy crusade against a Jewish doctor/scientist trying to work for the benefit of humanity? Evidence that religious belief plays a pivotal role in vaccine acceptance and rejection rates is documented by Dr. Hotez in the fact that Covid vaccine acceptance greatly improved in the African-American community only after Black pastors became involved and started prompting the vaccine from the pulpit. The same is true in reverse for white fundamentalist preachers. Also, as with all religious fundamentalism, this is not just a uniquely American or national problem. Slowing, impeding and halting scientific progress is a hallmark of religious fundamentalism worldwide and throughout recorded history. At risk now is medical research in other cutting-edge areas of medicine such as gene editing, stem cell, and neuroscience etc. Knowledge, progress, science and advancement (scientific or social) is dangerous to fundamental religious beliefs. Religious believers have a natural resentment against that which their beliefs cannot explain. Ironically, Dr. Hotez says “…it is impossible to talk about it without talking about it…” by this he means the politics, which is difficult enough, not the religion, which is nearly impossible.
When there is freedom of religion all freedoms are in danger. Of course, there is also fetish conservatism, far right extremism, and exaggerated libertarianism, all magnified by the dysfunction in the U.S. political system, but Christian fundamentalism and Bible literalism is the common source for all these fact free bigots. Dr. Hotez identifies the anti-science politics as strongest in Texas and the southern U.S. states without ever pointing out that this is the Bible Belt. He refers to “something terrible” which “has happened to broaden and intensify public rejection of vaccines and other biomedical innovations in the United States…” this is Christian fundamentalism and evangelicalism with Bible literalism, but this is my inference not the author’s. I believe the anti-science feature of far-right authoritarianism comes from religious fundamentalism. Anti-science leaders, groups and individuals employ threats and bullying tactics just as Christians do and as I have experienced first-hand. Dr. Hotez speaks about how the CDC and DHHS are reluctant to challenge the anti-vaccine movement. I believe this is the case because it is a fundamentally religious (Christian) movement, and government agencies do not want to be seen as offending religious beliefs even though those religious beliefs are themselves offensive to reason and dangerous to health. The agencies seem to think that pushback would only empower the anti-vaccine movement which only means they misunderstand it; it is a religious calling.
The fundamental troubling driver (religious beliefs) of anti-science aggression is also a method of forming cultural values, social attitudes, a way of life, a source of identity and a sense of community. In such cases, with such stakes, no compromise is possible. This is why anti-science aggression will not end. The epidemic of anti-science aggression may prove to be more lethal than any natural pandemic. The new brand of muscular Christianity is also very authoritarian and anti-science aggression has always been a feature of authoritarian regimes. I do like how Dr. Hotez connects the dots between anti-science ignorance with other conspiracy theories, QAnon, anti-Semitism, white supremacy as well as Russian disinformation efforts and other far right extremist views in politics. I just wish he would have made the final connection to Bible belief, fundamentalist Christianity and evangelicalism which is the belief system providing the ultimate and underlying metaphysical justification to be anti-science. It is not just an ancillary cause among many. This is why it will be nearly impossible to combat, it is tied to religion which distorts rational thinking and natural moral sensibilities.
Misunderstanding Freedom and Rights:
Dr. Hotez does not explain it in this way, but I would not him expect to do so, he is a doctor, not a philosopher or political scientist.
Two basic Concepts of Personal Rights
Individual Liberty: When individual rights are based upon an atomistic existence and a purely individualist view of human experience, or personal religious salvation and deliverance, the derivative rights which follow are thought of as purely singular personal rights. This is framed as personal choice, health freedom or medical freedom. Any other conception of rights other than as individual rights becomes unthinkable and falls outside of reality itself and is well, un-American which is worse. Ironically, this becomes the freedom to engage in medical quackery, but this is beside the point. The dark side of this individualist view is that one obtains the right to put the health and lives of other people at risk with the individual right to make a personal choice not to get vaccinated. This is framed as the libertarian right of “vaccine choice”.
Social Solidarity: Alternatively, personal rights derived from social soldiery or based on social bonds requiring each person who can do so, receive a vaccination. This at first seems contrary to personal rights but actually enhances the liberty of every individual by allowing them to engage with other people and participate in social life risk free or with much reduced risk and less fear. The freedom of individuals to move about and congregate is restored with a vaccine mandate. There is no longer a contradiction between individual liberty and social solidarity. There is a false belief that the requirements of human society are constraining on the individual but in truth, social solidarity is empowering. Deontic powers such as rights, duties, obligations thus arise. This is what holds human society together. In terms of personal rights, we must remember that given the organic nature and interlocking network that is human society, there is little if any action which we can take as individuals that does not affect someone else. Individual liberty only has value within a social structure which by definition limits individual liberty. The only way to grow and flourish as an individual is from the roots of social embeddedness. The alternative is chaos and anarchy as we see being played out in real time at the writing of this review.
Rethinking Illness:
My Synthesis: The individualist conception of rights results in mis-framing a public health issue as a personal rights issue. A pandemic is by definition a collective, not an individual problem. It requires thinking of illness in a different manner, as a community malady and not simply as the sickness of an individual. It requires a change in perspective. Disease is more effectively prevented by thinking of it in terms of containment and transmission rather than as simply an individual illness to be treated. Understanding the macro trends in disease and mortality patterns is the most effective way of keeping individuals healthy rather than simply treating diseases in individuals. For example, cholera was halted in the nineteenth century with an updated sewer system (a public investment), not improved medical care. Another example is refrigeration to eliminate the health hazards caused by spoilage. Simply stated, diseases such as Covid are more easily prevented than treated but this is still not understood by the anti-expert, anti-science, anti-vax, anti-intellectual public. Rights based purely on individualism creates a well-crafted but false narrative. Thinking in terms of community benefits instead of personal rights is an alien way of thinking for many people and not even possible in a completely individualistic or atomistic rights paradigm based on personal salvation.
Ironically, with the weakening and collapse of so many external social structures of authority and institutions, many of the moral and ethical constraints upon individuals are now seen as intolerable and unjustified. External social structures of authority have been replaced by the internal subjective authority of the ‘self’ and this reinforces the anti-science mindset about which Dr. Hotez so eloquently and effectively writes and warns.
An Odd and Troubling Reference turns Ironic
P. 3, To wit: “Scientists shaped our nation’s destiny through a successful Manhattan Project to defeat fascism in World War II.” This gave me pause. First, WWII fascism is usually taken to mean Nazi Germany. It is true that the Manhattan Project was inaugurated to beat the Germans in the race to develop the atomic bomb, but Germany was defeated without the use of the atomic bomb and without regard to the Manhattan Project. The atomic bomb was used, and I would argue needlessly, against Japan. Given that it was used against civilian population centers with hideously cruel and horrific results which included long-term health effects, illness and cancer for several generations, I find it odd that a medical doctor and scientist with the ethics and moral compass of Dr. Hotez, with his dedication to saving lives and improving health, would offer the Manhattan Project as a proud accomplishment of modern science. If anything, the atomic bomb demonstrates the dark side of science and of how scientific advances can be misused to destroy life and health on a hitherto unmanageable scale with unprecedented horror. With this, science became less certain and certainly no longer a certain force for human progress given the use of the atomic bomb to massacre people at an unprecedented level of horrifying cruelty and modern efficiency. Ironically, this vaulted scientific achievement might be part of the current anti-science mindset.
November 2, 2023
-audiobook
Displaying 1 - 30 of 145 reviews