Wading through the torrent of information available online is challenging for everyone. It can be hard to know what and whom to believe. We talk with the FDA Commissioner and other leaders on the frontlines of health and science about how to be more aware of false and misleading information, and its risks to our wellbeing and future innovation. And we discuss ways to stand up for science and stop the spread of misinformation.
Wading through the torrent of information available online is challenging for everyone. It can be hard to know what and whom to believe. We talk with the FDA Commissioner and other leaders on the frontlines of health and science about how to be more aware of false and misleading information, and its risks to our wellbeing and future innovation. And we discuss ways to stand up for science and stop the spread of misinformation.
Speaker X (00:06):
There's a quote usually attributed to the writer Mark Twain, that goes, "A lie can travel halfway around the world, while the truth is putting on its shoes. Funny thing about that, there's reason to doubt that Mark Twain ever said this at all. Thus, ironically, proving the point. And today, the quote, whoever said it, is truer than ever before.
Rachel King (00:32):
Misinformation and conspiracy theories have been around for as long as people have communicated with one another. Prior to the advent of social media, people spread misinformation through newspapers, magazines, TV, radio, and word of mouth. But social media has taken misinformation to a whole new level. Now a single individual can reach a billion people in a matter of minutes, and the impacts can be harmful for human health. In this episode, we talk with two guests who are working to empower people to be wise consumers of information. We also speak with someone who's a target of a conspiracy theory circulating right now, with potential consequences for future scientific innovation and health. I'm Rachel King, and you are listening to I Am BIO. As we've seen during the COVID-19 pandemic, misinformation can have serious consequences for our health and wellbeing. Our first guest is on the front lines of protecting public health, and waging the fight against misinformation.
Robert Califf (01:50):
I am Robert Califf, Commissioner, United States Food and Drug Administration.
Rachel King (01:55):
The FDA ensures the safety, efficacy and security of drugs and medical devices. Robert Califf is in his second stint as FDA Commissioner, and this time around, he's using his position to bring attention to the problem of misinformation.
Robert Califf (02:11):
I am deeply concerned and passionate about the issue of misinformation, because it kills people. When we look across the whole spectrum of medicine and how many great technologies we now have, that can extend useful life, it's essential that we get the truthful, reliable information to people, and don't get them mislead by untruthful or unreliable information. What could be more important than getting the right information to people so they make good decisions for themselves? I think it's fair to say that the pandemic unleashed a whole new era of misinformation, with deadly consequences. If we look at the effect of vaccination on the risk of death, it's an 80 to 90% reduction with the approved or authorized vaccines.
(02:59):
And then if you're unlucky enough to get infected, and you're in a high risk category, antivirals give you another 80 to 90% reduction in risk of death. Almost no one should be dying of COVID, given the protection that can be afforded. And so, when we look at the effect of misinformation in this case, it's literally causing people to die, and after going to the hospital, when it could be completely avoided by a very low risk intervention that is a vaccination and availability of an antiviral.
Rachel King (03:30):
The commissioner says he's seen a big increase in misinformation between his first term as head of FDA and today.
Robert Califf (03:37):
In 2016, when I was commissioner the first time, and then coming back, it is an enormous difference. Social media has advanced tremendously. We have billions of people who are now connected. And that was underway in 2016, but it's now a vast reality. And the purveyors of misinformation have gotten much more sophisticated, in their ability to not only give misleading information, and like [inaudible 00:04:02] salesman of old, often they're selling alternative interventions, which are not effective and may be dangerous. And so, it's a different world, and we're gonna have to do adapt what we do to this different world.
Rachel King (04:14):
Another big different? The COVID-19 pandemic and vaccines became the subject of a whole new subgenre of misinformation.
Robert Califf (04:23):
There's always been a concern about vaccination brewing in our society with people who were imagining conspiracies and other issues related to vaccinations. The pandemic, of course, released a torrent of appropriate societal concern, but also gave an avenue for purveyors of misinformation to take advantage of vulnerable people and promote ideas that were simply incorrect. Like, microchips in vaccines, for example. I'd love to see a scientific way to do that in the first place. And of course, none of that is happening. So, the pandemic not only gave people a venue or a stimulus for misinformation, but since people were more housebound and spending more time on the internet, the chance to amplify and promote misinformation also increased.
Rachel King (05:12):
The COVID emergency may have ended, but viral misinformation is still with us. Our next guest says it's probably here to stay, but that doesn't mean we can't do something about it.
Reed Tuckson (05:23):
I am Reed Tuckson, the co-founder of the Coalition for Trust in Health & Science, and I am also the co-founder of the Black Coalition Against COVID. We know that social media now allows any and everyone who has an opinion to present themselves as somehow an expert. This is a trend that is going to be very, very, very difficult to overcome. This is an unprecedented enemy that I don't think any of us fully understand how we're going to fully combat. We have a lot to learn in this regard. We're certainly going to be addressing the negative implications of social media, but we're also going to be addressing the opportunities that it presents for having informed conversations with the American people.
Rachel King (06:09):
Reed says misinformation about COVID was especially harmful to African Americans.
Reed Tuckson (06:14):
We do know from our experience that the initial stages of this pandemic were especially burdensome and disproportionately tragic for the black community. We were trying to run this race with an anvil on our back, of not only the historical legacy of distrust and a very deliberate campaign of misinformation targeted at our communities, but also we suffered from socioeconomic structural barriers that made the fight difficult, as well as challenges with access to the kinds of healthcare services that we needed.
Rachel King (06:49):
But for Reed and his colleagues at the Black Coalition Against COVID, which BIO has joined, overcoming those historical and structural barriers is their mission. And Reed says they've had tremendous success.
Reed Tuckson (07:02):
When the vaccine became available, we worked hard across the black community, particularly through the combination of black faith leaders, partnered with black health professionals and black social and fraternity organization as well, in addition to community grassroots organizations, all came together. We saw the first experience with the vaccine, we were way behind. However, we caught up after a year. And what is so exciting, at least in retrospect as we look back on it is, for the first time in our experience, we closed disparity's gap fairly rapidly, and we learned that we did it through our own hard work, sweat and labor, inside of our communities, diligently pursuing the work that had to be done, often and usually not funded, but yet we pulled ourselves up by the bootstraps, and just fought for each other's lives.
(07:58): We now know that after the second year of the pandemic, black life expectancy actually improved relative to white life expectancy, which decreased. So, the lesson being, despite the magnitude of our preexisting challenges, with an organized, engaged and hopefully financially supported black community infrastructure, we can use the examples we learned from the COVID vaccine experience, and be able to apply that to other longstanding health challenges.
Rachel King (08:28):
Social media companies are taking steps to stop the spread of false and misleading information. And Commissioner Califf says they could do more by working with federal agencies such as the FDA to fight lies with truth.
Robert Califf (08:41):
The question whether the FDA should work directly with social media companies is a charged topic right now. There are many members of Congress who think that we absolutely should not, that that would be suppression of free speech, since the government has such a powerful voice. On the other hand, there are commercially available products that allow us to monitor social media. And I think we have an obligation to do that, because in our mission, as I've already said, is giving people reliable and truthful information, that enables them to use medical products and food in a safe and effective manner. And when someone is promoting untruths out there on a large scale, it can lead to harmful consequences. Death, disability, that is our obligation to prevent.
(09:26): Now, we don't suppress people from speaking, that's not in FDA's remit and we don't do that, but what we can do is to put out truthful information to counter the misinformation which is out there.
Rachel King (09:38):
Reed says a big part of the solution is building trust.
Reed Tuckson (09:41):
Misinformation and/or the related mistrust knows no particular educational or geographical boundaries. When we are fighting against mistrust and misinformation, it is an American issue, and it doesn't do us much good to finger point, to categorize or to stigmatize other human beings. What we have to learn is how do we regain that trust, and how do we learn to talk to people in a way that helps them to be not only willing, but armed and prepared to make evidence based, personally appropriate health choices and decisions for themselves, their families, and the communities in which they live.
Rachel King (10:21):
Commissioner Califf agrees that building trust is critical, but he says it's a formidable challenge.
Robert Califf (10:28):
We have a lot of discussions in our society about trust. It's a complicated issue, and there's no question that trust in government is not at a high level at this point. Lack in trust in government is also not new to America, it's really almost intrinsic to the fabric of American independence and the way people think. This is an especially important component of building trust is validation by others who are trusted, by those who may not trust government. Having said that, this is a very complicated issue, and I can't say we're winning the battle right now on misinformation.
Rachel King (11:04):
When we return from the break, we'll talk about a case of misinformation that's playing out right now. We'll dive into what this kind of misinformation could mean for the future of scientific research and innovation, and why we must stand up for science. We'll also talk about possible solutions. So, stay with us as we continue this discussion.
(11:44): We're just a few short weeks away from gathering for the world's most influential biotech meeting, BIO 2023. The conference will be in Boston, from June 5th through June 8th, and the theme is stand up for science. It's not too late to register, and you don't wanna miss the informative sessions, the networking and uniting to stand up for innovation. Register today at BIO.org/events.
(12:21): Michael Flynn floated the conspiracy theory, recently, let's hear what he had to say.
Michael Flynn (12:26):
Yeah, well, somebody sent me a thing this morning where they were talking about putting the vaccine into salad dressing or salads.
Speaker X (12:32):
Right.
Michael Flynn (12:32):
Have you seen this?
Speaker X (12:33):
Yes.
Michael Flynn (12:34):
Have you seen this? I mean, it's ... And I'm, and I'm thinking to myself, th- th- ... I'm ... This is a bizarro world, right?
Speaker X (12:39):
(laughs)
Michael Flynn (12:39):
This is definitely the bizarro world. People are, I mean, these people are seriously thinking about how to impose their will on us, uh, in- in our society.
Rachel King (12:49):
Before the break, we talked with two people who are leading efforts to combat inaccurate and misleading information about COVID and other health issues. Our next guest, Jules Bernstein, is a former journalist who wrote an article for the University of California at Riverside, about the university's research on whether edible plants could be mRNA vaccine factories.
Jules Bernstein (13:11): I am Jules Bernstein. I am senior public information officer for the University of California at Riverside. The project was, and to my knowledge still is, testing chloroplasts, which are small organs in plant cells that convert sunlight into sugar and other molecules that fuel plant growth. They're basically tiny solar powered sugar factories. And the researchers want to know if chloroplasts can be made to grow molecules other than sugar, such as messenger RNA or mRNA vaccines. Currently those vaccines have to be kept very cold, to keep them stable, which makes transporting and storing them challenging.
(13:50): If this project is successful, it would overcome these challenges by making the vaccines stable at room temperature. The researchers are still working to demonstrate that material containing the mRNA vaccines can successfully be delivered into chloroplast, and that the plants can produce enough of the mRNA to rival a traditional shot. All of these goals are still being tested, and the ability to make plants do this does not yet exist.
Rachel King (14:16): To repeat, the ability to make plants produce mRNA does not yet exist. And if it ever did, it would be strictly regulated. But that hasn't stopped people from jumping to wild conclusions about the research, with some implying that there's a conspiracy to sneak vaccines into the food supply. Jules explains what happens next.
Jules Bernstein (14:39): Well, there has been a response to this article, it has been quite mixed. Some of the response has been positive because it's a visionary use of nanotechnology to try and solve a big problem that exists with a particular type of pharmaceutical. And yes, some media outlets misrepresented the mRNA possibilities as some sort of conspiracy to vaccinate people unwittingly. This misinformation is even propagated by one time national security advisor, Michael Flynn, who somehow decided that COVID vaccines are being snuck into salad dressing. And he shared that idea on a podcast. To be clear, the technology to grow mRNA vaccines in plants does not even exist yet, and if it did, there have never been plans to infuse that technology into salads or their dressings. The article has been deeply misrepresented by people in some cases
Rachel King (15:35): Jules's article was published almost two years ago. Fast forward to now, and we have bills being introduced in state legislatures to ban vaccines in food, something that is not happening.
Jules Bernstein (15:48): But the topic becomes popular, it is very common for legislators to jump on the popularity of a topic and craft regulation. Because this idea became popular in certain circles, I'm not surprised that there is legislation craft around it. It's unfortunate that they are crafting legislation based on a wholly crafted fiction that doesn't exist and probably never will.
Rachel King (16:12): Despite everything that's happened since Jules wrote her article, she says it's important to share truthful information. If anything, she says, this experience strengthens her resolve to communicate about science.
Jules Bernstein (16:25): This article became a target because it involved vaccines. And during the pandemic, vaccines were a highly polarizing topic. I thank that part of the reason it became such a polarizing topic is because many adults do not understand the science behind the technology that powers the vaccines. And people are afraid of what they don't understand. So, it falls to people like myself, science communicators, scientists, doctors, people who do understand the science, to do a better job of explaining how it works so that it minimizes the fear around it.
Rachel King (17:02): Jules says another reason to continue sharing information about scientific research is the possible impact on future innovation.
Jules Bernstein (17:10): I don't believe that this incident will affect the willingness to do this kind of research going forward. Unfortunately, it may affect researchers' willingness to share it and discuss it. It may impact lawmakers' willingness to fund certain types of science. The greater thread here, in my opinion, isn't that research will stop, but that there'll be less sharing, including in public forums, which will limit collaboration and slow progress toward discoveries that could benefit everyone.
Rachel King (17:39): Commissioner Califf says the impact of misinformation goes beyond COVID and conspiracy theories about vaccines. Misinformation could create hurdles to future innovations that we need to protect our health.
Robert Califf (17:51): The route between misinformation and innovation is an interesting one. You know, I prefer to look at it in public health terms always, and the question is, when we have a medical problem, or in the case of food, a biotechnology problem, where innovation would make a difference, misinformation can really slow things down because people are distracted by the wrong things, that we always have to consider the risk and benefits of interventions of any kind. And so, the discussion about that balance of risk and benefits is fair and should always be done. But when the public or significant parts of the public are distracted by misinformation, it leads to a lot more concern among investors, and also a concern that leads to more examination, that takes more time of the evidence.
(18:40): Now, it's hard enough to generate the evidence that we need in a truthful and honest, reliable system, but when there's a big distraction, it makes it much tougher.
Rachel King (18:50): Jules says that despite some visceral reactions to her article, and even a few death threats, she won't be intimidated, she will stand up for science.
Jules Bernstein (18:59): What these researchers are doing is attempting to make it easier to save lives and prevent disease. That's a worthy goal, and they shouldn't let people who wholly twist the truth stop them from pursuing a really noble goal.
(19:13): I think the best thing that we can do is to not be intimidated into silence, but instead to push ourselves to do a better job of explaining science and raising enthusiasm for exciting science projects in a way that makes it difficult to twist any of what we've said into something that isn't true. Someone will always find a way to bend the truth, if they have a particular agenda or they have a particular goal in mind, that conflicts somehow with what you've said, but we should take it as a call to do a better job of explaining things that are difficult to explain.
Rachel King (19:55): Standing up for science is one cure for misinformation. Another solution, says Dr. Califf, is taking responsibility to seek out the truth from reliable sources.
Robert Califf (20:05): For the average person, the key is to identify reliable sources that are trusted. One nice thing is, most Americans actually do trust their physician, their nurse, their pharmacist, when it comes to medical information. And so, I think the key is to, when you hear something that sounds a little odd but could be true, to go to a professional and find out. And when you're on the internet, reliable sources like Mayo Clinic, Harvard, have a lot of lay information that's reliable and useful. You don't see the high level social media companies are sending people to those sources preferentially.
Rachel King (20:42): And while each of us has an individual responsibility to seek out and share factual information, there's a communal responsibility as well, according to Dr. Reed Tuckson.
Reed Tuckson (20:53): A problem of this magnitude cannot be won by any individual people or individual organization. This is gonna require all of us, working together. And so, the Coalition for Trust in Health & Science had a pretty interesting vision, and that vision was, what if for the first time in history we could bring together the entire health ecosystem in one principal moral, informed coalition engagement, to not only talk to the American people, but find ways of giving them the tools and the information they need to participate in an evermore increasingly complex and scientifically intense healthcare world.
(21:34): And so, I think the answer is that, we found, to our great excitement and joy that, yes, you can actually bring together the entire healthcare ecosystem. And so, we now have all of our basic scientists represented by the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and those people along with Academy Health, our health services researchers, Research America, the advocacy for the NIH and other federal research appariti, we have BIO and pharma, who are the users of this research, and are making products from it. We have all the major hospital associations, the American Hospital Association, the Federation for American Hospitals. We have the AMA, and the Council of Medical [inaudible 00:22:13], all the medical specialties.
(22:15): We have the nursing associations, we have the American health insurance plans, we have the American Public Health Association, we have Ethesis, we have organizations that are interested in teaching Americans about science literacy. 60 organizations now coming together. So, what I believe is, that first and foremost, what needs to be done, si for us to say to the American people, "We get it, we understand. You have a problem, you are concerned." This is important to us enough that we are going to come together collectively and address it. Number two, we know that you need to understand how to evaluate the information that you are hearing and seeing online, and that you're reading in your news reports.
(22:54): We will help you to have rules and guidance got how to make sense, and how to understand the trustworthiness of that information that you are reading, the currency of it. And then number three, we have to find other ways of being supportive, like adopting Secondary Science Teachers Association, so that the children graduating high school will be prepared to function in an increasingly complex genetic base and science based health system. So, we're coming together to bring those programs that work, turn into a learning laboratory, and leverage and reproduce best practices in a variety of ways, so that years from now, the American people will say, "Well, we may have lost trust in a lot of American institutions, but when it comes to healthcare, they care about me, they are concerned, they are helping me to have the information and how to understand the information I need to make my personally appropriate choices for me, my family and the community in which I live."
Rachel King (23:52): That's a great way to wrap up this critical conversation, with a resolve to stand up for science, a reminder to take responsibility for the information we share and consume, and a testament that it takes a village to solve a problem as complex and consequential. BIO is proud to join with partner organizations to increase understanding of, and trust in health in science.
(24:16): Thank you to our guests for joining us. FDA commissioner Robert Califf, Dr. Reed Tuckson, of the Coalition for Trust in Health and Science, and the Black Coalition Against COVID, and UC Riverside's senior public information officer, Jules Bernstein. And more importantly, thank you for your vital work to save lives.
(24:38): Make sure to subscribe, rate, and/or review this podcast and follow us on Twitter, Facebook and LinkedIn, at IamBIOtech, and subscribe to Good Day BIO at BIO.org/goodday. This episode was developed by executive producer Theresa Brady, and producers Lynne Finnerty and Rob Gutnikoff. It was engineered and mixed by Jay Goodman, with theme music created by Luke Smith and Sam Brady.